CVE-2026-90431

CVE CVE-2026-90431EUVD EUVD-2026-82092Published 2026-09-17T16:09:51.000Z

What the advisory describes

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: remoteproc: Prevent crash handling to race with rproc_del() There's no synchronization between rproc_crash_handler_work() and rproc_del(), as such it's possible for a driver to be removed while crash-handler work is scheduled, or even executing - resulting in use-after-free issues. To avoid this the scheduled work need to be cancelled and synchronized against before the removal proceeds. In order to ensure that this doesn't race with the reporting, and thereby scheduling new work, a "deleting" flag is introduced. This is similar to the RPROC_DELETE state that was introduced to ensure that "start" didn't race with rproc_del(), but the existing mechanism can not be used as it's valid to call rproc_report_crash() in atomic context - and the "state" is protected by a mutex. In the event that work is cancelled the pm_stay_awake() is left unbalanced and need to be unrolled. The blocking and cancelling of crash-handler work prior to the actual rproc_shutdown() call does have the explicit side-effect that crashes resulting from the shutdown process will not enter the crash-handling path, and as such will not generate devcoredumps etc. Due to the existing mutual exclusion between these code paths there's no concrete reduction in functionality, but further work would be needed to handle this case.

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.

• Linux — Linux patch: 5.15.221; 8afd519c3470f685f964deebd61aa51d83cde90a <61862ed651b2493573e6d2192d5640bc6616f5d0; 8afd519c3470f685f964deebd61aa51d83cde90a <47de033918cd772146f7438aa04471c020b2dedc; patch: 5.10.270; patch: 6.6.157; patch: 6.12.110; 8afd519c3470f685f964deebd61aa51d83cde90a <50f232c26298923d39a48dc8e03d1732e5a5dcf1; 8afd519c3470f685f964deebd61aa51d83cde90a <a8a62cb4d2f3fd6aa06e86f1711c62d2a4cf17d5; 3.7; 8afd519c3470f685f964deebd61aa51d83cde90a <74ee3b2f5767447c57959994341e5b95f1079977; 8afd519c3470f685f964deebd61aa51d83cde90a <a31d9562eeec5c4103c202fc87651f6e7d3d0035; patch: 0; patch: 7.2.6; patch: 7.3-rc1; patch: 6.18.52; 8afd519c3470f685f964deebd61aa51d83cde90a <f15cde11298402f803d5dda9cb9f95eea3d2ca40; 8afd519c3470f685f964deebd61aa51d83cde90a <69af36f1fb7d24d287662fef6b2093bcf847a9db; patch: 6.1.188

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.

• Linux — Linux

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.