Patchlage

CVE-2026-74261

CVE CVE-2026-74261EUVD EUVD-2026-59408Published 2026-08-15T05:57:38.000ZLast changed 2026-08-17T05:16:03.000Z

What the advisory describes

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ALSA: seq: avoid stale FIFO cells during resize snd_seq_fifo_resize() still needs to publish the replacement pool before it waits for FIFO users. A blocking snd_seq_read() holds f->use_lock while it sleeps, so concurrent senders must be able to queue to the new pool and wake that reader instead of failing against a closing old pool. However, snd_seq_fifo_event_in() duplicates an event before it takes f->lock, and snd_seq_read() can dequeue a cell and later call snd_seq_fifo_cell_putback() if copy_to_user() or snd_seq_expand_var_event() fails. If resize swaps f->pool and detaches oldhead in between, either path can relink an old-pool cell after the snapshot. That stale cell sits outside the drained oldhead list, keeps oldpool->counter elevated, and can leave snd_seq_pool_delete() waiting for the retired pool to drain. Keep the existing swap-before-wait ordering in snd_seq_fifo_resize(), but reject stale cells before any FIFO relink. Revalidate event-in cells under f->lock and retry them against the published replacement pool, and free stale putback cells instead of linking them back into the FIFO. The buggy scenario involves two paths, with each column showing the order within that path: resize path: relink path: 1. Allocate newpool. 1. Take f->use_lock. 2. Swap f->pool to newpool and 2. Duplicate or dequeue an old-pool detach oldhead. cell before oldpool closes. 3. Mark oldpool closing and 3. Reach a later relink point after wait for FIFO users. resize published newpool. 4. Free oldhead and delete 4. Relink the old-pool cell after oldpool. resize detached oldhead. 5. Drop f->use_lock. The reproducer reports a resize ioctl blocked in the expected pool teardown path: signal: resize iteration=98 target_pool=4 exceeded 250ms (elapsed=251ms) diagnostic: resize_tid=651 wchan=snd_seq_pool_done diagnostic: resize_tid=651 stack= snd_seq_pool_done+0x5b/0x140 snd_seq_pool_delete+0x7a/0x90 snd_seq_fifo_resize+0x193/0x1e0 snd_seq_ioctl_set_client_pool+0x214/0x260 snd_seq_ioctl+0x119/0x540 __x64_sys_ioctl+0xd1/0x120 do_syscall_64+0xbb/0x2f0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f A second run with larger pools hit the same target path: signal: resize iteration=32 target_pool=64 exceeded 250ms (elapsed=251ms) diagnostic: resize_tid=663 wchan=snd_seq_pool_done diagnostic: resize_tid=663 stack= snd_seq_pool_done+0x5b/0x140 snd_seq_pool_delete+0x7a/0x90 snd_seq_fifo_resize+0x193/0x1e0 snd_seq_ioctl_set_client_pool+0x214/0x260 snd_seq_ioctl+0x119/0x540 __x64_sys_ioctl+0xd1/0x120 do_syscall_64+0xbb/0x2f0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f

Source: EUVD (ENISA), in the words of the advisory.

Products the advisory names

These come from the advisory itself, not from any check we performed.

The versions shown are the advisory's own. Patchlage compares no version numbers and derives no judgement from them — which version is installed is something a person has to look up.

Carried in the product catalogue

An estate covering these products can be recorded in Patchlage. An advisory about them appears in the next morning's situation report.

Does this concern one of your customers?

This page cannot answer that — it does not know your estate. Whoever has recorded their environments gets the answer the morning after publication, together with a paragraph they can forward to the customer unedited.

Try it for 28 days

Patchlage reports hits and suspected hits. About everything else this system says nothing — neither this page nor the situation report ever claims that an estate is safe.