CVE-2026-89521

Published Sep 11, 2026

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/core: Handle pick_task() releasing the rq lock Core scheduling's pick_next_task() breaks when a ->pick_task() implementation can release the rq lock. The selection state derived on entry is only valid while the lock is held continuously. Once a pick can drop the lock, an interleaving selection can invalidate all of it: the single-CPU fast path can commit an uncookied pick although the core went cookied during the release, and forceidle committed by the interleaving selection skews the restarted pass's accounting. Fix it by restarting the whole selection when a pick returns RETRY_TASK after releasing the lock: a single restart point above the state derivation replaces the per-loop restart labels, so a retry picks up state committed by interleaving selections and accounts and resets forceidle like a fresh selection would. need_sync and fi_before latch across retries. Clock validity can't be re-derived - there is no program-ordered way to tell whether the own and core rq clocks are still updated after the lock was released, as other lockers' pin cycles may or may not have invalidated them. When restarting, clear core_clock_updated so that the sibling loop re-updates the core rq, and update the own rq clock if invalidated.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-89521?

Run a free security scan — no signup, results in seconds.

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-89521? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/core: Handle pick_task() releasing the rq lock Core scheduling's pick_next_task() breaks when a ->pick_task() implementation can release the rq lock. The selection state derived on entry is only valid while the lock is held continuously. Once a pick can drop the lock, an interleaving selection can invalidate all of it: the single-CPU fast path can commit an uncookied pick although the core went cookied during the release, and forceidle committed by the interleaving selection skews the restarted pass's accounting. Fix it by restarting the whole selection when a pick returns RETRY_TASK after releasing the lock: a single restart point above the state derivation replaces the per-loop restart labels, so a retry picks up state committed by interleaving selections and accounts and resets forceidle like a fresh selection would. need_sync and fi_before latch across retries. Clock validity can't be re-derived - there is no program-ordered way to tell whether the own and core rq clocks are still updated after the lock was released, as other lockers' pin cycles may or may not have invalidated them. When restarting, clear core_clock_updated so that the sibling loop re-updates the core rq, and update the own rq clock if invalidated.
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-89521? +
You can use Secably's free Website Scanner to check your website for known vulnerabilities. For infrastructure scanning, use the Port Scanner to identify exposed services that may be affected. Check the vendor advisories linked above for specific patch and version information.

Don't wait for an exploit

Scan your website for vulnerabilities like CVE-2026-89521 — free, no signup required.