https://vulnerability.circl.lu Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Mon, 28 Sep 2026 09:41:23 +0000 https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-89985 <p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>memcg: keep folio&#39;s objcg same as its node</p> <p>memcg_reparent_objcgs() has an inherent assumption that a folio&#39;s objcg is the objcg of the folio&#39;s node. Folio migration across nodes breaks that assumption: the new folio simply inherits the old folio&#39;s objcg while living on a different node.</p> <p>Once the assumption is broken, the reparenting of the folio&#39;s objcg and the reparenting of the folio&#39;s LRU list are no longer atomic. memcg_reparent_objcgs() handles one node per iteration and drops all the locks in between, so the objcg gets reparented in the iteration for the objcg&#39;s node while the LRU list gets spliced in the iteration for the folio&#39;s node. Any LRU operation on that folio in between resolves its lruvec through the objcg, and thus takes the lru_lock of the wrong memcg, not the lru_lock of the list the folio is actually on.</p> <p>Fix this by selecting the objcg by folio_nid() at charge time, and by re-deriving it for the destination node in mem_cgroup_migrate() and mem_cgroup_replace_folio().</p> <p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p> <p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p> <p>memcg: keep folio&#39;s objcg same as its node</p> <p>memcg_reparent_objcgs() has an inherent assumption that a folio&#39;s objcg is the objcg of the folio&#39;s node. Folio migration across nodes breaks that assumption: the new folio simply inherits the old folio&#39;s objcg while living on a different node.</p> <p>Once the assumption is broken, the reparenting of the folio&#39;s objcg and the reparenting of the folio&#39;s LRU list are no longer atomic. memcg_reparent_objcgs() handles one node per iteration and drops all the locks in between, so the objcg gets reparented in the iteration for the objcg&#39;s node while the LRU list gets spliced in the iteration for the folio&#39;s node. Any LRU operation on that folio in between resolves its lruvec through the objcg, and thus takes the lru_lock of the wrong memcg, not the lru_lock of the list the folio is actually on.</p> <p>Fix this by selecting the objcg by folio_nid() at charge time, and by re-deriving it for the destination node in mem_cgroup_migrate() and mem_cgroup_replace_folio().</p> https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-89985