CVE-2023-54232

m68k: Only force 030 bus error if PC not in exception table

N/A
Published: December 30, 2025 at 12:11 PM UTC
Updated: June 17, 2026 at 06:47 AM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorLinux Kernel

Using Linux by Linux?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Linux - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
N/A
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.2%

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: m68k: Only force 030 bus error if PC not in exception table __get_kernel_nofault() does copy data in supervisor mode when forcing a task backtrace log through /proc/sysrq_trigger. This is expected cause a bus error exception on e.g. NULL pointer dereferencing when logging a kernel task has no workqueue associated. This bus error ought to be ignored. Our 030 bus error handler is ill equipped to deal with this: Whenever ssw indicates a kernel mode access on a data fault, we don't even attempt to handle the fault and instead always send a SEGV signal (or panic). As a result, the check for exception handling at the fault PC (buried in send_sig_fault() which gets called from do_page_fault() eventually) is never used. In contrast, both 040 and 060 access error handlers do not care whether a fault happened on supervisor mode access, and will call do_page_fault() on those, ultimately honoring the exception table. Add a check in bus_error030 to call do_page_fault() in case we do have an entry for the fault PC in our exception table. I had attempted a fix for this earlier in 2019 that did rely on testing pagefault_disabled() (see link below) to achieve the same thing, but this patch should be more generic. Tested on 030 Atari Falcon.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

2.6.18 ≤ v < 4.14.3122.6.18 ≤ v < 4.19.2802.6.18 ≤ v < 5.10.1772.6.18 ≤ v < 5.15.1052.6.18 ≤ v < 5.4.2402.6.18 ≤ v < 6.1.222.6.18 ≤ v < 6.2.92.6.18 ≤ v < 6.32.6.18f2325ecebc5b7988fd49968bd3a660fd1594dc84
Vendor states this is fixed in 1a6059f5ed57f48edfe7159404ff7d538d9d405b (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 2100e374251a8fc00cce1916cfc50f3cb652cbe3 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 54fa25ffab2b700df5abd58c136d64a912c53953 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 8bf8d5dade4c5e1d8a2386f29253ed28b5d87735 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in df1da53a7e98f0b2a0eb2241c154f148f2f2c1d8 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in e36a82bebbf7da814530d5a179bef9df5934b717 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in ec15405b80fc15ffc87a23d01378ae061c1aba07 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in f55cb52ec98b22125f5bda36391edb8894f7e8cf (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 2.6.18 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 4.14.312 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 4.19.280 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.10.177 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.15.105 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.4.240 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.1.22 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.2.9 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.3 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet, and no fixed version or vendor advisory is recorded against it.

Quick Info

StatusDEFERRED

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card