CVE-2026-93254
What it is
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64: entry: Avoid unnecessary local_irq_disable() on kernel exit Currently, when exiting to kernel mode, we attempt involuntary preemption. The preemption logic expects IRQs to be disabled, which is why we call local_irq_disable() before attempting preemption. However, depending on the context, local_irq_disable() may be unnecessary: - __el1_irq(), the non-NMI EL1 IRQ path, already has IRQs disabled, so local_irq_disable() is redundant. - irqentry_exit_to_kernel_mode_preempt() immediately returns when exiting from an NMI-like context, so calling local_irq_disable() beforehand is unnecessary work. Furthermore, it confuses the pNMI state tracking when we are in a context with interrupts disabled and the GIC_PRIO_PSR_I_SET bit is set in the PMR, leading to a warning when CONFIG_ARM64_DEBUG_PRIORITY_MASKING=y: WARNING: ./arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h:63 at arm64_exit_to_kernel_mode+0xb8/0xc0, CPU#40: retsnoop/31805 CPU: 40 UID: 0 PID: 31805 Comm: retsnoop Not tainted 7.2.0-rc6-next-20260805 #7 PREEMPTLAZY pstate: 234013c9 (nzCv DAIF +PAN -UAO +TCO +DIT +SSBS BTYPE=--) pc : arm64_exit_to_kernel_mode (arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:63) lr : el1_abort (arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:323) pmr: 000000f0 Call trace: arm64_exit_to_kernel_mode (arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:63) (P) el1_abort (arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:323) el1h_64_sync_handler (arch/arm64/kernel/entry-common.c:449) el1h_64_sync (arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S:589) [...] Split arm64_exit_to_kernel_mode() into preempt, non-preempt, and dispatch parts so that we can avoid this extra work where it is not needed and avoid breaking the pNMI tracking logic.
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
- PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
- 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
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days
- Record status
- Received
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-2026-93254.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-93254. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
