GHSA-X5G3-HX3C-GFXX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-25 09:31 – Updated: 2026-06-30 03:37In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mm/list_lru: drain before clearing xarray entry on reparent
memcg_reparent_list_lrus() clears the dying memcg's xarray entry with xas_store(&xas, NULL) before reparenting its per-node lists into the parent. This opens a window where a concurrent list_lru_del() arriving for the dying memcg sees xa_load() == NULL, walks to the parent in lock_list_lru_of_memcg(), takes the parent's per-node lock, and calls list_del_init() on an item still physically linked on the dying memcg's list.
If another in-flight thread holds the dying memcg's per-node lock at the same moment (another list_lru_del, or a list_lru_walk_one running an isolate callback), both threads modify ->next/->prev pointers on the same physical list under different locks. Adjacent items can corrupt each other's links.
Fix it by reversing the order: reparent each per-node list and mark the child's list lru dead and then clear the xarray entry. Any concurrent list_lru op that finds the still-set xarray entry either takes the dying memcg's per-node lock (synchronizing with the drain) or sees LONG_MIN and walks to the parent, where the items now live.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-53153"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-820"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-06-25T09:16:32Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nmm/list_lru: drain before clearing xarray entry on reparent\n\nmemcg_reparent_list_lrus() clears the dying memcg\u0027s xarray entry with\nxas_store(\u0026xas, NULL) before reparenting its per-node lists into the\nparent. This opens a window where a concurrent list_lru_del() arriving\nfor the dying memcg sees xa_load() == NULL, walks to the parent in\nlock_list_lru_of_memcg(), takes the parent\u0027s per-node lock, and calls\nlist_del_init() on an item still physically linked on the dying memcg\u0027s\nlist.\n\nIf another in-flight thread holds the dying memcg\u0027s per-node lock at the\nsame moment (another list_lru_del, or a list_lru_walk_one running an\nisolate callback), both threads modify -\u003enext/-\u003eprev pointers on the same\nphysical list under different locks. Adjacent items can corrupt each\nother\u0027s links.\n\nFix it by reversing the order: reparent each per-node list and mark the\nchild\u0027s list lru dead and then clear the xarray entry. Any concurrent\nlist_lru op that finds the still-set xarray entry either takes the dying\nmemcg\u0027s per-node lock (synchronizing with the drain) or sees LONG_MIN and\nwalks to the parent, where the items now live.",
"id": "GHSA-x5g3-hx3c-gfxx",
"modified": "2026-06-30T03:37:13Z",
"published": "2026-06-25T09:31:19Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-53153"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2026-53153"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2492790"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2b66496d794e98f7aeec7688573051f22ec40bac"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/98733f3f0becb1ae0701d021c1748e974e5fa55c"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/c19ff4351214f059349788e13e70e74325831ff6"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2026/cve-2026-53153.json"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.