CVE-2026-93084

What the bug is

The SCMI bus notifier acquires an SCMI handle when the driver core emits BUS_NOTIFY_BIND_DRIVER, before invoking the protocol driver probe callback. The protocol probe path only checks whether sdev->handle is set. If device_link_add() fails after the handle has been acquired, the protocol device can still bind with a valid handle but without the dependency link to the SCMI parent. A concurrent parent unbind can then miss the child and tear down the SCMI instance while the child still holds a handle into it. If the protocol driver probe later fails, for example with -EPROBE_DEFER, the driver core emits BUS_NOTIFY_DRIVER_NOT_BOUND rather than BUS_NOTIFY_UNBOUND_DRIVER. The SCMI notifier only released the handle on BUS_NOTIFY_UNBOUND_DRIVER, so each failed protocol-device bind leaked the SCMI instance users refcount and left sdev->handle set after the failed probe. Make the link helper report failure and drop the acquired handle if the link cannot be created. Also handle BUS_NOTIFY_DRIVER_NOT_BOUND in the same cleanup path used for unbind so failed probes balance the earlier BUS_NOTIFY_BIND_DRIVER acquisition.

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/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c

What this is

SYSTEM CONTROL & POWER/MANAGEMENT INTERFACE (SCPI/SCMI) Message Protocol driversMAINTAINERS section matched on drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/ · arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org · Maintained

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, bookworm · linux-6.12?

?

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

2026-09-17 (31 days ago)source

CVSS

no vector published, unrated

Attack vector

not published

EPSS

0.21%, higher than 10.3% of all CVEssource

CISA KEV

not listedthe KEV catalogue

Debian urgency

unimportantsource

Subsystem

drivers/firmware

Upstream fixes

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

Introduced	Fixed in	Commit
6.3	6.6.157	0f860db24ee9
6.3	6.12.110	df273eced7ce
6.3	6.18.52	a54dc23e8bd2
6.3	7.2.6	77d2985d1e80
6.3	7.3	e3a5c30d233c

Debian advisories