CVE-2026-46245

What the bug is

amdgpu_dm_hpd_init() may see connectors without a valid dc_link. The code already checks dc_link for the polling decision, but later unconditionally dereferences it when setting up HPD interrupts. Assign dc_link early and skip connectors where it is NULL. Fixes the below: drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_irq.c:940 amdgpu_dm_hpd_init() error: we previously assumed 'dc_link' could be null (see line 931) drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_irq.c 923 /* 924 * Analog connectors may be hot-plugged unlike other connector 925 * types that don't support HPD. Only poll analog connectors. 926 */ 927 use_polling |= 928 amdgpu_dm_connector->dc_link && ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The patch adds this NULL check but hopefully it can be removed 929 dc_connector_supports_analog(amdgpu_dm_connector->dc_link->link_id.id); 930 931 dc_link = amdgpu_dm_connector->dc_link; dc_link assigned here. 932 933 /* 934 * Get a base driver irq reference for hpd ints for the lifetime 935 * of dm. Note that only hpd interrupt types are registered with 936 * base driver; hpd_rx types aren't. IOW, amdgpu_irq_get/put on 937 * hpd_rx isn't available. DM currently controls hpd_rx 938 * explicitly with dc_interrupt_set() 939 */ --> 940 if (dc_link->irq_source_hpd != DC_IRQ_SOURCE_INVALID) { ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ If it's NULL then we are trouble because we dereference it here. 941 irq_type = dc_link->irq_source_hpd - DC_IRQ_SOURCE_HPD1; 942 /* 943 * TODO: There's a mismatch between mode_info.num_hpd 944 * and what bios reports as the # of connectors with hpd

Where it lives

The fix touches these files. If the subsystem is one you do not use, the practical exposure is lower, though the package is still the vulnerable one.

drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_irq.c

What this is

AMD DISPLAY COREMAINTAINERS section matched on drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/ · amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org · Supported

Show whether Debian builds this, per release

Not established. This site could not find the build rule for the affected file in the kernel trees Debian ships, so it has no answer about whether Debian compiles this code. Read that as unknown, never as absent.

• bookworm, trixie, forky, sid?

?

not established - no Makefile entry for the affected file

Where a release above reads "not established", no build rule for the affected file was found in that release's kernel tree. That is a gap in this lookup, not a finding that the code is absent.

From the configuration Debian publishes for every kernel flavour it builds. It covers only the architectures Debian ships a linux-config package for, and nothing about a kernel you built yourself. Debian's own status above stays authoritative about the source package.MAINTAINERS

Signals

Published

2026-06-03 (5 months ago)source

CVSS

no vector published, unrated

Attack vector

not published

EPSS

0.16%, higher than 4.7% of all CVEssource

CISA KEV

not listedthe KEV catalogue

Debian urgency

not yet assignedsource

Subsystem

drivers/gpu

Upstream fixes

The versions the CNA records as introducing and fixing this, and the commit for each. source

Introduced	Fixed in	Commit
4.15	6.18.57	1d15503e454b
4.15	6.19.4	a490e4d3c9fe
4.15	7.0	226a40c06a18