CVE-2026-80895

mshv: Order pt_vp_array publish against irqfd assertion path

N/A
Published: September 4, 2026 at 05:11 PM UTC
Updated: September 4, 2026 at 06:36 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: mshv: Order pt_vp_array publish against irqfd assertion path mshv_partition_ioctl_create_vp() initialises a VP struct (allocations, mutex_init, init_waitqueue_head, page mappings) and then publishes the pointer into partition->pt_vp_array. Several ISR paths read this array locklessly: the intercept ISR, the two scheduler ISRs, and mshv_try_assert_irq_fast() on the irqfd fast path. Of these, only mshv_try_assert_irq_fast() can structurally race the publish. It runs from an eventfd waker without holding pt_mutex, and MSHV_IRQFD does not require the target lapic_apic_id (== vp_index) to refer to an existing VP at registration time. A user can therefore register an irqfd targeting a yet-to-be-created VP, then trigger mshv_try_assert_irq_fast() concurrently with MSHV_CREATE_VP for the same index. On weakly-ordered architectures the reader can observe a non-NULL pointer in pt_vp_array before the initialising stores to the VP struct become visible, leading to use of partially-initialised fields (e.g. vp_register_page). The other ISR readers cannot reach this race: the hypervisor will not generate intercept or scheduler messages for a VP that has never been told to run, and the user can only call MSHV_RUN_VP on the VP fd returned by MSHV_CREATE_VP, which by construction is returned after the publish. Leave those readers as plain loads. Use smp_store_release() in mshv_partition_ioctl_create_vp() to publish the pointer, and pair it with smp_load_acquire() in mshv_try_assert_irq_fast(). On x86 these compile to plain accesses under TSO; on ARM64 they emit one-instruction acquire/release barriers, acceptable on this fast path. The destroy-side path (destroy_partition() clearing pt_vp_array[i] to NULL after kfree(vp)) has a separate ordering and lifetime concern that is out of scope here.

Affected

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

6.15 ≤ v < 6.18.446.15 ≤ v < 7.1.86.15 ≤ v < 7.26.15621191d709b14882270dfd8ea5d7d6cdfebe2c35
Vendor states this is fixed in 062aa5dcc49a9ad96726a80c2a0ab0a1233bc2b9 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in b098dc869219c15dc49bf9cf63fb5fc1481d3373 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in eba2bf5daa7933f94c53ebbbf0f567d4274716df (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.15 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.18.44 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 7.1.8 (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