data built 2026-10-19T13:16:53Z

Look up another CVE · open CVE-2026-80626 in the interactive tracker

CVE-2026-80626

powerpc/perf: fix preempt count underflow in fsl_emb_pmu_del

EPSS 0.2%

Published 2026-08-28 (2 months ago) by the Linux kernel CNA. Subsystem arch/powerpc. Debian urgency: not yet assigned.

Debian does not build this code. The per-release build detail is under "Where it lives" below.

What to do, per Debian release

Debian's own status for CVE-2026-80626 in every release this site tracks, and what each one means in practice. Every status below is the one the Debian Security Team publishes for this CVE. source

ReleaseStatus VersionWhat this means
Debian 12bookwormfixed6.1.180-1Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 6.1.180-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts.
Debian 13trixiefixed6.12.100-1Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 6.12.100-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts.
Debian 14forkyfixed7.1.5-1Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 7.1.5-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts.
Debian unstablesidfixed7.1.5-1Update the kernel and reboot. Fixed in 7.1.5-1. A running kernel keeps the old code until the machine restarts.

The vulnerability

What the bug is

fsl_emb_pmu_del() unconditionally calls put_cpu_var(cpu_hw_events) at the 'out:' label, but only calls the matching get_cpu_var() after the 'i < 0' early-return check. When event->hw.idx is negative the function jumps to 'out:' without having taken get_cpu_var(), and the trailing put_cpu_var() then issues an unmatched preempt_enable(), underflowing preempt_count. On a CONFIG_PREEMPT=y kernel preempt_count would underflow and eventually present as a 'scheduling while atomic' BUG. Move put_cpu_var() to pair with get_cpu_var() so the percpu access is correctly bracketed and the 'out:' label only handles perf_pmu_enable.

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.

arch/powerpc/perf/core-fsl-emb.c

What this is
LINUX FOR POWERPC (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)MAINTAINERS section matched on arch/powerpc/ · linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org · Supported
Kernel module
none to look for. The file would have gone into core_fsl_emb, and Debian does not compile it into that module, so finding core_fsl_emb in lsmod would say nothing about this CVE.

Check it on the machine

grep -wE 'CONFIG_FSL_EMB_PERF_EVENT|CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS' /boot/config-$(uname -r)

Reads the booted kernel's own configuration, on the machine and nowhere else. =y is built in, =m is a module, and an is not set line means the code is not there.

Show whether Debian builds this, per release

Debian does not build this code. In 4 releases below, every kernel flavour Debian publishes has the switch off, so the vulnerable file is compiled into no kernel binary Debian ships.

  • bookworm, trixie, forky, sidn
n
not enabled on any flavour - this release does not build the code
Build switches
CONFIG_FSL_EMB_PERF_EVENT, CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
Reads as
all on means the file is compiled; any one off means it is not.

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 kbuild Makefiles Debian linux-config packages

Signals

Published
2026-08-28 (2 months ago)source
CVSS
no vector published, unrated
Attack vector
not published
EPSS
0.22%, higher than 11.6% of all CVEssource
CISA KEV
not listedthe KEV catalogue
Debian urgency
not yet assignedsource
Subsystem
arch/powerpc

Upstream fixes

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

IntroducedFixed inCommit
2.6.345.10.261c0c7722308c5
2.6.345.15.21267aeb1eb93d4
2.6.346.1.1789a515e00b001
2.6.346.6.1455397142d60aa
2.6.346.12.97b89477077c83
2.6.346.18.4073711688479d
2.6.347.1.5b504fd953664
2.6.347.281e3a8603046

Why the CNA scored it this way

The kernel CNA published no CVSS vector and no reasoning for CVE-2026-80626, which is why it is shown as unrated rather than given an invented score. 6,405 of the 20,413 CVEs here carry reasoning; this is not one of them.