Bug 2516657 (CVE-2026-72289) - CVE-2026-72289 kernel: KVM: arm64: vgic: Check the interrupt is still ours before migrating it
Summary: CVE-2026-72289 kernel: KVM: arm64: vgic: Check the interrupt is still ours be...
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: CVE-2026-72289
Product: Security Response
Classification: Other
Component: vulnerability
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Product Security DevOps Team
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2026-08-15 06:24 UTC by OSIDB Bzimport
Modified: 2026-10-12 18:51 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2026:76739 0 None None None 2026-10-08 09:50:20 UTC
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2026:81406 0 None None None 2026-10-12 18:51:06 UTC

Description OSIDB Bzimport 2026-08-15 06:24:20 UTC
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

KVM: arm64: vgic: Check the interrupt is still ours before migrating it

vgic_prune_ap_list() drops both ap_list_lock and irq_lock while migrating
an interrupt to another vCPU. After reacquiring the locks it only checks
that the affinity is unchanged (target_vcpu == vgic_target_oracle(irq))
before moving the interrupt, which assumes that an interrupt whose affinity
is preserved is still queued on this vCPU's ap_list.

That assumption no longer holds if the interrupt is taken off the ap_list
while the locks are dropped. vgic_flush_pending_lpis() removes the
interrupt from the list and sets irq->vcpu to NULL, but leaves
enabled/pending/target_vcpu untouched. As the interrupt is still enabled
and pending, vgic_target_oracle() returns the same target_vcpu, so the
affinity check passes and list_del() is run a second time on an entry that
has already been removed.

Also check that the interrupt is still assigned to this vCPU
(irq->vcpu == vcpu) before moving it.

Comment 4 Jon Orris 2026-10-08 09:50:19 UTC
This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9

Via RHSA-2026:76739 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:76739

Comment 5 Jon Orris 2026-10-12 18:51:05 UTC
This issue has been addressed in the following products:

  Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10

Via RHSA-2026:81406 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:81406


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.