CVE-2026-52946

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/fcntl: fix SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order in fasync signaling A SOFTIRQ-safe to SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order deadlock can occur in send_sigio() and send_sigurg() when a process group receives a signal. When FASYNC is configured for a process group (PIDTYPE_PGID), both functions use read_lock(&tasklist_lock) to traverse the task list. However, they are frequently called from softirq context: - send_sigio() via input_inject_event -> kill_fasync - send_sigurg() via tcp_check_urg -> sk_send_sigurg (NET_RX_SOFTIRQ) The deadlock is caused by the rwlock writer fairness mechanism: 1. CPU 0 (process context) holds read_lock(&tasklist_lock) in do_wait(). 2. CPU 1 (process context) attempts write_lock(&tasklist_lock) in fork() or exit() and spins, which blocks all new readers. 3. CPU 0 is interrupted by a softirq (e.g., TCP URG packet reception). 4. The softirq calls send_sigurg() and attempts to acquire read_lock(&tasklist_lock), deadlocking because CPU 1 is waiting. Since PID hashing and do_each_pid_task() traversals are already RCU-protected, the read_lock on tasklist_lock is no longer strictly required for safe traversal. Fix this by replacing tasklist_lock with rcu_read_lock(), aligning the process group signaling path with the single-PID path. This also mitigates a potential remote denial of service vector via TCP URG packets. Lockdep splat: ===================================================== WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected [...] Chain exists of: &dev->event_lock --> &f_owner->lock --> tasklist_lock Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(tasklist_lock); local_irq_disable(); lock(&dev->event_lock); lock(&f_owner->lock); <Interrupt> lock(&dev->event_lock); *** DEADLOCK ***

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited over the network without logging in. High risk of service disruption.

Exploit odds

0.5% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

1. 2026-06-24 17:17 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-11-10 13:19 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.5% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 7.5 HIGH (CVSS).
• Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.

Details

Published

2026-06-24 17:17 UTC

Last modified

2026-11-10 13:19 UTC

Exploit probability

0.5% · EPSS, next 30 days

Weakness

CWE-667

Record status

Modified

Affected

• Linux Kernel < 5.10.259
• Linux Kernel < 5.15.210
• Linux Kernel < 6.1.176
• Linux Kernel < 6.6.143
• Linux Kernel < 6.12.94
• Linux Kernel < 6.18.36
• Linux Kernel < 7.0.13
• Linux Kernel < 7.1.1

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 7.5

Attack vector

Network

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

None

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

None

Availability

High

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-2026-52946.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-52946. 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