CVE-2026-90242

Published Sep 17, 2026

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: iommu/vt-d: Fix iopf_refcount leak on RID domain replacement intel_iommu_attach_device() enables IOPF for the new domain but never disables it for the old one. device_block_translation(), called at the start of the function, tears down translation but does not touch any IOPF state; blocking_domain_attach_dev() has to call iopf_for_domain_remove() explicitly before invoking it for exactly this reason. identity_domain_attach_dev() has the same problem. Its comment claims that no PRI handling is needed because the device has been put in the blocking state, but the blocking state and the IOPF reference count are independent of each other. As a result, replacing a domain that has an iopf_handler with another domain at RID level leaks a reference in info->iopf_refcount. The count never drops back to zero, so iopf_queue_remove_device() is never called and iommu_disable_pci_pri() triggers its WARN_ON(info->iopf_refcount) when the device is released. The PASID paths already handle this correctly by way of iopf_for_domain_replace(); convert the two RID paths to do the same. Using the replace helper rather than a bare remove keeps the enable before the disable, so the reference count does not transiently reach zero and evict the device from the IOPF queue.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-90242?

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

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-90242? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: iommu/vt-d: Fix iopf_refcount leak on RID domain replacement intel_iommu_attach_device() enables IOPF for the new domain but never disables it for the old one. device_block_translation(), called at the start of the function, tears down translation but does not touch any IOPF state; blocking_domain_attach_dev() has to call iopf_for_domain_remove() explicitly before invoking it for exactly this reason. identity_domain_attach_dev() has the same problem. Its comment claims that no PRI handling is needed because the device has been put in the blocking state, but the blocking state and the IOPF reference count are independent of each other. As a result, replacing a domain that has an iopf_handler with another domain at RID level leaks a reference in info->iopf_refcount. The count never drops back to zero, so iopf_queue_remove_device() is never called and iommu_disable_pci_pri() triggers its WARN_ON(info->iopf_refcount) when the device is released. The PASID paths already handle this correctly by way of iopf_for_domain_replace(); convert the two RID paths to do the same. Using the replace helper rather than a bare remove keeps the enable before the disable, so the reference count does not transiently reach zero and evict the device from the IOPF queue.
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-90242? +
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-2026-90242 — free, no signup required.