CVE-2026-80876

ring-buffer: Fix event length with forced 8-byte alignment

N/A
Published: September 4, 2026 at 04:48 PM UTC
Updated: September 4, 2026 at 05:36 PM 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: ring-buffer: Fix event length with forced 8-byte alignment When RB_FORCE_8BYTE_ALIGNMENT is true, rb_calculate_event_length() reserves the space of event->array[0] for placing the data length and rb_update_event() stores the data length in event->array[0] accordingly. As a result the whole event length will add extra 4 bytes for sizeof(event.array[0]) unconditionally. But ring_buffer_event_length() only subtracts the sizeof(event->array[0]) for events larger than RB_MAX_SMALL_DATA + sizeof(event->array[0]). As a result, small events on architectures with RB_FORCE_8BYTE_ALIGNMENT=true report a data length that is 4 bytes larger than expected. To fix it, add the RB_FORCE_8BYTE_ALIGNMENT as a condition to subtract the size of that length field whenever RB_FORCE_8BYTE_ALIGNMENT is true. This issue is observed in a riscv64 kernel with CONFIG_HAVE_64BIT_ALIGNED_ACCESS set to y, when we run ftrace selftest trace_marker_raw.tc, we get the weird log: for cases where the id is 1..100, the number of data field is 8*N, but once id exceeds 100, the number of data field becomes 8*N+4: # 1 buf: 58 00 00 00 80 5e d1 63 (number of data field is 8*1) ... # a buf: 58 ... (number of data field is 8*2) ... # 64 buf: 58 ... (number of data field is 8*13) # 65 buf: 58 ... (number of data field is 8*13+4) After applying this change, the number of data field keeps being 8*N+4 consistently.

Affected

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

2.6.34 ≤ v < 5.10.2612.6.34 ≤ v < 5.15.2122.6.34 ≤ v < 6.1.1782.6.34 ≤ v < 6.12.972.6.34 ≤ v < 6.18.402.6.34 ≤ v < 6.6.1452.6.34 ≤ v < 7.1.52.6.34 ≤ v < 7.22.6.342271048d1b3b0aabf83d25b29c20646dcabedc05
Vendor states this is fixed in 14057268e79654c3e8ea2c9b5204cb9644b2964d (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 24c3fa71f9947b0e1f3b954db1b769b44140192e (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 3a63a11897c7ba32d1be7a3fdbc48a8b01cf4992 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7c9f0ccf9f04142458d2ac3d39414f4acae242f0 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in c37e0a4b79a6bbb96ce5ffe279d7c001e20529e0 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in cfada73fabe2ccc06ec77fe2ceaa088689213326 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in dbcb8635b1eb7603818591cf745c7b1d714f7ac6 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in ec5e96aee75d27779b9a860307679f13f33adb0c (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 2.6.34 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.10.261 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.15.212 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.1.178 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.12.97 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.18.40 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.6.145 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.1.5 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.2 (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

StatusRECEIVED

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