Kestrel
대시보드로 돌아가기
CVE-2026-98644UNKNOWNMITRENVD대응게시일: 2026. 10. 18.수정일: 2026. 10. 19.CNA: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67Received

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: bpf: Avoid soft lockup in __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch() __htab_

위협 신호 · CVSS · EPSS · KEV

정기 패치· 높은 악용 신호 없음
CVSS
—unknown

이론적 심각도 점수

EPSS
—

예측 데이터 없음

KEV
미등재

실측 악용 기록 없음

권장 대응 기한60일 이내CISA SSVC 기준

계획된 패치 주기 내 조치(60일 이내)

외부 노출· KEV 미등재 · 자동화 어려움 · 부분 영향 · 외부 노출

CVSS 벡터 · 메트릭

CVSS 벡터 정보 없음

상세 설명

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

bpf: Avoid soft lockup in __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch()

__htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch() has no rescheduling point. The
batch count bounds how many entries are copied out, not how many
buckets are visited, so one BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_BATCH call can walk the
map end to end. The empty-bucket fast path is worse: it stays inside
a single rcu_read_lock() / bpf_disable_instrumentation() section for
any run of consecutive empty buckets.

That holds up on small maps, but it falls apart at scale. On a
144-CPU arm64 host running a CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE kernel, periodic
BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_BATCH calls against an LRU hash map with 16,777,216
buckets held a CPU inside the batch op for 77+ seconds and triggered
the soft lockup watchdog.

Commit 75134f16e7dd ("bpf: Add schedule points in batch ops") fixed this
same problem in the generic batch ops, but not in this htab-native path,
which every htab-based hash map variant uses for its lookup[_and_delete]
batch ops.

Complete that fix here. Leave the critical section after 64 consecutive
empty buckets, call cond_resched_tasks_rcu_qs(), and resume at the saved
bucket cursor. No locks are held at that point, and resuming from the
cursor is already the function's behavior for non-empty buckets. Add the
same call to the per-bucket loop after copy_to_user(), where every lock
has been dropped. cond_resched_rcu() is not enough here: sleeping with
bpf_prog_active elevated makes tracing programs on that CPU silently
skip their invocations.

Plain cond_resched() is not enough either. It is a no-op under PREEMPT
and PREEMPT_LAZY, the only models arm64 and x86 have offered since
commit 7dadeaa6e851 ("sched: Further restrict the preemption modes").
It is also never a Tasks RCU quiescent state, in any model: the
reschedule counts as a preemption. The walking task stays a holdout and
stalls every synchronize_rcu_tasks() caller, ftrace and BPF trampoline
teardown included, until the syscall returns [1].
cond_resched_tasks_rcu_qs() is the usual tool for that [2]. It reports
the quiescent state at each yield and still reschedules as
cond_resched() does on PREEMPT_NONE and PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY kernels.

AI 심층 분석

공격 시나리오 · 재현 가능한 PoC 페이로드 · 즉시 적용 가능한 차단 패치를 한 번에 받아 보세요. 보안 운영팀이 그대로 점검·티켓팅에 쓸 수 있는 형태로 정리해 드립니다.