<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-09-29T07:08:53.563235+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-47744</id>
    <title>CVE-2024-47744 — KVM: Use dedicated mutex to protect kvm_usage_count to avoid deadlock</title>
    <updated>2026-09-29T07:08:54.939273+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>KVM: Use dedicated mutex to protect kvm_usage_count to avoid deadlock</p>
<p>Use a dedicated mutex to guard kvm_usage_count to fix a potential deadlock
on x86 due to a chain of locks and SRCU synchronizations.  Translating the
below lockdep splat, CPU1 #6 will wait on CPU0 #1, CPU0 #8 will wait on
CPU2 #3, and CPU2 #7 will wait on CPU1 #4 (if there's a writer, due to the
fairness of r/w semaphores).</p>
<p>CPU0                     CPU1                     CPU2
1   lock(&amp;kvm-&gt;slots_lock);
2                                                     lock(&amp;vcpu-&gt;mutex);
3                                                     lock(&amp;kvm-&gt;srcu);
4                            lock(cpu_hotplug_lock);
5                            lock(kvm_lock);
6                            lock(&amp;kvm-&gt;slots_lock);
7                                                     lock(cpu_hotplug_lock);
8   sync(&amp;kvm-&gt;srcu);</p>
<p>Note, there are likely more potential deadlocks in KVM x86, e.g. the same
pattern of taking cpu_hotplug_lock outside of kvm_lock likely exists with
__kvmclock_cpufreq_notifier():</p>
<p>cpuhp_cpufreq_online()
  |
  -&gt; cpufreq_online()
     |
     -&gt; cpufreq_gov_performance_limits()
        |
        -&gt; __cpufreq_driver_target()
           |
           -&gt; __target_index()
              |
              -&gt; cpufreq_freq_transition_begin()
                 |
                 -&gt; cpufreq_notify_transition()
                    |
                    -&gt;…</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-47744"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
