CVE-2026-93057

Published Sep 17, 2026

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: ufs: core: Avoid possible memory reclaim deadlock in TX EQTR context TX EQTR may run while devfreq gear scaling has quiesced the UFS tagset. In that context, functions ufshcd_tx_eqtr(), __ufshcd_tx_eqtr() and ufs_qcom_get_rx_fom() allocate memory with GFP_KERNEL. If direct reclaim is triggered, reclaim/writeback can depend on I/O to UFS device. Because the queue is quiesced, this can cause deadlock. Use memalloc_noio_save/restore() in ufshcd_tx_eqtr() to cover all allocations in the TX EQTR call tree, including: - params->eqtr_record in ufshcd_tx_eqtr() - eqtr_data in __ufshcd_tx_eqtr() - params in ufs_qcom_get_rx_fom() This is preferred over tagging individual call sites with GFP_NOIO, as it automatically covers any future allocations added anywhere in the call tree without requiring each caller to be aware of this constraint. [mkp: fix label as suggested by Bart]

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-93057?

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

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-93057? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: ufs: core: Avoid possible memory reclaim deadlock in TX EQTR context TX EQTR may run while devfreq gear scaling has quiesced the UFS tagset. In that context, functions ufshcd_tx_eqtr(), __ufshcd_tx_eqtr() and ufs_qcom_get_rx_fom() allocate memory with GFP_KERNEL. If direct reclaim is triggered, reclaim/writeback can depend on I/O to UFS device. Because the queue is quiesced, this can cause deadlock. Use memalloc_noio_save/restore() in ufshcd_tx_eqtr() to cover all allocations in the TX EQTR call tree, including: - params->eqtr_record in ufshcd_tx_eqtr() - eqtr_data in __ufshcd_tx_eqtr() - params in ufs_qcom_get_rx_fom() This is preferred over tagging individual call sites with GFP_NOIO, as it automatically covers any future allocations added anywhere in the call tree without requiring each caller to be aware of this constraint. [mkp: fix label as suggested by Bart]
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-93057? +
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-2026-93057 — free, no signup required.