CVE-2026-98999
What it is
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/xe: Fix stale pinned_link entry when fb-pin performs the final unpin xe_bo_pin_external() and xe_bo_unpin_external() maintain the bo's pinned_link list membership in xe->pinned.late.external, based on whether the current call is the outermost pin or the final unpin. However, the same external bo's pin_count can also be raised and lowered directly by __xe_pin_fb_vma()/__xe_unpin_fb_vma(), which pin the bo as a display scanout buffer without going through xe_bo_pin_external()/xe_bo_unpin_external() at all, and have no notion of, or ownership over, pinned_link. If a bo is pinned both externally (e.g. dma-buf export) and as an fb, and the external unpin happens first, xe_bo_unpin_external() correctly observes pin_count > 1 and leaves the bo on pinned_link. When the fb unpin later performs the true last unpin (pin_count 1 -> 0), it never touches pinned_link, leaving the bo linked on xe->pinned.late.external indefinitely. Once the bo is subsequently freed, this stale list entry points into freed memory, corrupting the list and risking a use-after-free the next time the list is walked or spliced. The backup object pin/unpin sites in xe_bo_notifier_prepare_pinned()/ xe_bo_notifier_unprepare_pinned() have the same bypass characteristic, though they never add their bo to a pinned list, so are not affected by this particular list-corruption issue. Move the pinned_link removal into xe_bo_account_unpin(), which already runs on every unpin path (kernel, external, framebuffer, backup object) right before the true 1 -> 0 pin_count transition. Since list_del_init() only operates on the node itself, this removal is list-agnostic and safe to perform regardless of which list (external or kernel_bo_present) the bo happens to be linked on, or which code path is performing the final unpin. Drop the now-redundant explicit list_del_init() calls in xe_bo_unpin_external() and xe_bo_unpin(). v2: - New patch v3: - Rebased on changes to previous patch. (cherry picked from commit ca58d36a1f93af586ee93b340c9f9fd81312cc01)
At a glance
- Exploitability
- Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of data exposure, data tampering, service disruption.
- 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
- ReservedThe CVE id was reserved by its CNA
- 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: 7.8 HIGH (CVSS).
- Fix: none linked yet, which raises it.
Details
- Published
- Last modified
- Exploit probability
- 0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days
- Record status
- Received
Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 7.8
- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges needed
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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-2026-98999.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2026-98999. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.
