CVE-2022-50652

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: uio: uio_dmem_genirq: Fix missing unlock in irq configuration Commit b74351287d4b ("uio: fix a sleep-in-atomic-context bug in uio_dmem_genirq_irqcontrol()") started calling disable_irq() without holding the spinlock because it can sleep. However, that fix introduced another bug: if interrupt is already disabled and a new disable request comes in, then the spinlock is not unlocked: root@localhost:~# printf '\x00\x00\x00\x00' > /dev/uio0 root@localhost:~# printf '\x00\x00\x00\x00' > /dev/uio0 root@localhost:~# [ 14.851538] BUG: scheduling while atomic: bash/223/0x00000002 [ 14.851991] Modules linked in: uio_dmem_genirq uio myfpga(OE) bochs drm_vram_helper drm_ttm_helper ttm drm_kms_helper drm snd_pcm ppdev joydev psmouse snd_timer snd e1000fb_sys_fops syscopyarea parport sysfillrect soundcore sysimgblt input_leds pcspkr i2c_piix4 serio_raw floppy evbug qemu_fw_cfg mac_hid pata_acpi ip_tables x_tables autofs4 [last unloaded: parport_pc] [ 14.854206] CPU: 0 PID: 223 Comm: bash Tainted: G OE 6.0.0-rc7 #21 [ 14.854786] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.16.0-0-gd239552ce722-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [ 14.855664] Call Trace: [ 14.855861] <TASK> [ 14.856025] dump_stack_lvl+0x4d/0x67 [ 14.856325] dump_stack+0x14/0x1a [ 14.856583] __schedule_bug.cold+0x4b/0x5c [ 14.856915] __schedule+0xe81/0x13d0 [ 14.857199] ? idr_find+0x13/0x20 [ 14.857456] ? get_work_pool+0x2d/0x50 [ 14.857756] ? __flush_work+0x233/0x280 [ 14.858068] ? __schedule+0xa95/0x13d0 [ 14.858307] ? idr_find+0x13/0x20 [ 14.858519] ? get_work_pool+0x2d/0x50 [ 14.858798] schedule+0x6c/0x100 [ 14.859009] schedule_hrtimeout_range_clock+0xff/0x110 [ 14.859335] ? tty_write_room+0x1f/0x30 [ 14.859598] ? n_tty_poll+0x1ec/0x220 [ 14.859830] ? tty_ldisc_deref+0x1a/0x20 [ 14.860090] schedule_hrtimeout_range+0x17/0x20 [ 14.860373] do_select+0x596/0x840 [ 14.860627] ? __kernel_text_address+0x16/0x50 [ 14.860954] ? poll_freewait+0xb0/0xb0 [ 14.861235] ? poll_freewait+0xb0/0xb0 [ 14.861517] ? rpm_resume+0x49d/0x780 [ 14.861798] ? common_interrupt+0x59/0xa0 [ 14.862127] ? asm_common_interrupt+0x2b/0x40 [ 14.862511] ? __uart_start.isra.0+0x61/0x70 [ 14.862902] ? __check_object_size+0x61/0x280 [ 14.863255] core_sys_select+0x1c6/0x400 [ 14.863575] ? vfs_write+0x1c9/0x3d0 [ 14.863853] ? vfs_write+0x1c9/0x3d0 [ 14.864121] ? _copy_from_user+0x45/0x70 [ 14.864526] do_pselect.constprop.0+0xb3/0xf0 [ 14.864893] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.865228] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.865556] __x64_sys_pselect6+0x76/0xa0 [ 14.865906] do_syscall_64+0x60/0x90 [ 14.866214] ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode+0x2a/0x50 [ 14.866640] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.866972] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.867286] ? do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x90 [ 14.867626] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd [...] stripped [ 14.872959] </TASK> ('myfpga' is a simple 'uio_dmem_genirq' driver I wrote to test this) The implementation of "uio_dmem_genirq" was based on "uio_pdrv_genirq" and it is used in a similar manner to the "uio_pdrv_genirq" driver with respect to interrupt configuration and handling. At the time "uio_dmem_genirq" was introduced, both had the same implementation of the 'uio_info' handlers irqcontrol() and handler(). Then commit 34cb27528398 ("UIO: Fix concurrency issue"), which was only applied to "uio_pdrv_genirq", ended up making them a little different. That commit, among other things, changed disable_irq() to disable_irq_nosync() in the implementation of irqcontrol(). The motivation there was to avoid a deadlock between irqcontrol() and handler(), since it added a spinlock in the irq handler, and disable_irq() waits for the completion of the irq handler. By changing disable_irq() to disable_irq_nosync() in irqcontrol(), we also avoid the sleeping-whil ---truncated---

At a glance

Exploit odds

0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

No patch or advisory is linked yet. Look at mitigations or restrict exposure.

Timeline

1. 2025-12-09 01:16 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-06-17 05:23 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: not scored yet.
• Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.

Details

Published

2025-12-09 01:16 UTC

Last modified

2026-06-17 05:23 UTC

Exploit probability

0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Deferred

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2022-50652.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2022-50652. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge