CVE-2026-97530

Published Sep 25, 2026

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: qla2xxx: Fix soft lockup polling continuation IOCB signature qla27xx_copy_multiple_pkt() and qla27xx_copy_fpin_pkt() poll rsp_q->ring_ptr->signature for RESPONSE_PROCESSED (0xDEADDEAD) to decide whether the next continuation IOCB has arrived, spinning on cpu_relax() without advancing the ring or decrementing the entry count while it has not. response_t::signature lives at byte offset 60, but a continuation IOCB (sts_cont_entry_t / struct sts_cont_entry_ext) carries raw FC frame payload at that offset (data[56..59]). A received frame whose payload bytes happen to equal 0xDEADDEAD is therefore misread as "not yet arrived", and the loop spins forever in interrupt/DPC context, causing a CPU soft lockup. The poll is also unnecessary: callers of qla27xx_copy_multiple_pkt() (PT_LS4_UNSOL and the NVMe purls path) already gate on qla_chk_cont_iocb_avail(), which guarantees all entry_count IOCBs are present before copying begins. The sibling helper __qla_copy_purex_to_buffer() already drops the signature poll and relies on the entry_type == STATUS_CONT_TYPE guard instead. Remove the signature busy-wait from both helpers, keeping the entry_type guard, and gate the FPIN path with qla_chk_cont_iocb_avail() so it defers and re-processes on the next interrupt once all continuation IOCBs have arrived, mirroring the ELS_AUTH_ELS and PT_LS4_UNSOL arms. With this the signature field is never read on a continuation IOCB, eliminating the payload-aliasing lockup.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2026-97530?

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

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2026-97530? +
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: qla2xxx: Fix soft lockup polling continuation IOCB signature qla27xx_copy_multiple_pkt() and qla27xx_copy_fpin_pkt() poll rsp_q->ring_ptr->signature for RESPONSE_PROCESSED (0xDEADDEAD) to decide whether the next continuation IOCB has arrived, spinning on cpu_relax() without advancing the ring or decrementing the entry count while it has not. response_t::signature lives at byte offset 60, but a continuation IOCB (sts_cont_entry_t / struct sts_cont_entry_ext) carries raw FC frame payload at that offset (data[56..59]). A received frame whose payload bytes happen to equal 0xDEADDEAD is therefore misread as "not yet arrived", and the loop spins forever in interrupt/DPC context, causing a CPU soft lockup. The poll is also unnecessary: callers of qla27xx_copy_multiple_pkt() (PT_LS4_UNSOL and the NVMe purls path) already gate on qla_chk_cont_iocb_avail(), which guarantees all entry_count IOCBs are present before copying begins. The sibling helper __qla_copy_purex_to_buffer() already drops the signature poll and relies on the entry_type == STATUS_CONT_TYPE guard instead. Remove the signature busy-wait from both helpers, keeping the entry_type guard, and gate the FPIN path with qla_chk_cont_iocb_avail() so it defers and re-processes on the next interrupt once all continuation IOCBs have arrived, mirroring the ELS_AUTH_ELS and PT_LS4_UNSOL arms. With this the signature field is never read on a continuation IOCB, eliminating the payload-aliasing lockup.
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2026-97530? +
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-2026-97530 — free, no signup required.