<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-09-29T21:27:45.942370+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2022-49760</id>
    <title>CVE-2022-49760 — mm/hugetlb: fix PTE marker handling in hugetlb_change_protection()</title>
    <updated>2026-09-29T21:27:45.944922+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>mm/hugetlb: fix PTE marker handling in hugetlb_change_protection()</p>
<p>Patch series "mm/hugetlb: uffd-wp fixes for hugetlb_change_protection()".</p>
<p>Playing with virtio-mem and background snapshots (using uffd-wp) on
hugetlb in QEMU, I managed to trigger a VM_BUG_ON().  Looking into the
details, hugetlb_change_protection() seems to not handle uffd-wp correctly
in all cases.</p>
<p>Patch #1 fixes my test case.  I don't have reproducers for patch #2, as it
requires running into migration entries.</p>
<p>I did not yet check in detail yet if !hugetlb code requires similar care.</p>
<p>This patch (of 2):</p>
<p>There are two problematic cases when stumbling over a PTE marker in
hugetlb_change_protection():</p>
<p>(1) We protect an uffd-wp PTE marker a second time using uffd-wp: we will
    end up in the "!huge_pte_none(pte)" case and mess up the PTE marker.</p>
<p>(2) We unprotect a uffd-wp PTE marker: we will similarly end up in the
    "!huge_pte_none(pte)" case even though we cleared the PTE, because
    the "pte" variable is stale. We'll mess up the PTE marker.</p>
<p>For example, if we later stumble over such a "wrongly modified" PTE marker,
we'll treat it like a present PTE that maps some garbage page.</p>
<p>This can, for example, be triggered by mapping a memfd backed by huge
pages, registering uffd-wp, uffd-wp'ing an unmapped page and (a)
uffd-wp'ing it a second time; or (b) uffd-unprotecting it; or (c)
unregistering uffd-wp. Then, ff we trigger fallocate…</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2022-49760"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
