Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
slimbus: qcom-ngd-ctrl: Avoid ABBA on tx_lock/ctrl->lock
During the SSR/PDR down notification the tx_lock is taken with the
intent to provide synchronization with active DMA transfers.
But during this period qcom_slim_ngd_down() is invoked, which ends up in
slim_report_absent(), which takes the slim_controller lock. In multiple
other codepaths these two locks are taken in the opposite order (i.e.
slim_controller then tx_lock).
The result is a lockdep splat, and a possible deadlock:
rprocctl/449 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff00009793e620 (&ctrl->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: slim_report_absent (drivers/slimbus/core.c:322) slimbus
but task is already holding lock:
ffff00009793fb50 (&ctrl->tx_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: qcom_slim_ngd_ssr_pdr_notify (drivers/slimbus/qcom-ngd-ctrl.c:1475) slim_qcom_ngd_ctrl
which lock already depends on the new lock.
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&ctrl->tx_lock);
lock(&ctrl->lock);
lock(&ctrl->tx_lock);
lock(&ctrl->lock);
The assumption is that the comment refers to the desire to not call
qcom_slim_ngd_exit_dma() while we have an ongoing DMA TX transaction.
But any such transaction is initiated and completed within a single
qcom_slim_ngd_xfer_msg().
Prior to calling qcom_slim_ngd_exit_dma() the slim_controller is torn
down, all child devices are notified that the slimbus is gone and the
child devices are removed.
Stop taking the tx_lock in qcom_slim_ngd_ssr_pdr_notify() to avoid the
deadlock.
slimbus: qcom-ngd-ctrl: Avoid ABBA on tx_lock/ctrl->lock
During the SSR/PDR down notification the tx_lock is taken with the
intent to provide synchronization with active DMA transfers.
But during this period qcom_slim_ngd_down() is invoked, which ends up in
slim_report_absent(), which takes the slim_controller lock. In multiple
other codepaths these two locks are taken in the opposite order (i.e.
slim_controller then tx_lock).
The result is a lockdep splat, and a possible deadlock:
rprocctl/449 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff00009793e620 (&ctrl->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: slim_report_absent (drivers/slimbus/core.c:322) slimbus
but task is already holding lock:
ffff00009793fb50 (&ctrl->tx_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: qcom_slim_ngd_ssr_pdr_notify (drivers/slimbus/qcom-ngd-ctrl.c:1475) slim_qcom_ngd_ctrl
which lock already depends on the new lock.
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0 CPU1
---- ----
lock(&ctrl->tx_lock);
lock(&ctrl->lock);
lock(&ctrl->tx_lock);
lock(&ctrl->lock);
The assumption is that the comment refers to the desire to not call
qcom_slim_ngd_exit_dma() while we have an ongoing DMA TX transaction.
But any such transaction is initiated and completed within a single
qcom_slim_ngd_xfer_msg().
Prior to calling qcom_slim_ngd_exit_dma() the slim_controller is torn
down, all child devices are notified that the slimbus is gone and the
child devices are removed.
Stop taking the tx_lock in qcom_slim_ngd_ssr_pdr_notify() to avoid the
deadlock.
Published:
2026-07-01
Score:
n/a
EPSS:
n/a
KEV:
No
Impact:
n/a
Action:
n/a
Analysis and contextual insights are available on OpenCVE Cloud.
Remediation
No vendor fix or workaround currently provided.
Additional remediation guidance may be available on OpenCVE Cloud.
Tracking
Sign in to view the affected projects.
Advisories
No advisories yet.
References
History
Wed, 01 Jul 2026 13:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: slimbus: qcom-ngd-ctrl: Avoid ABBA on tx_lock/ctrl->lock During the SSR/PDR down notification the tx_lock is taken with the intent to provide synchronization with active DMA transfers. But during this period qcom_slim_ngd_down() is invoked, which ends up in slim_report_absent(), which takes the slim_controller lock. In multiple other codepaths these two locks are taken in the opposite order (i.e. slim_controller then tx_lock). The result is a lockdep splat, and a possible deadlock: rprocctl/449 is trying to acquire lock: ffff00009793e620 (&ctrl->lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: slim_report_absent (drivers/slimbus/core.c:322) slimbus but task is already holding lock: ffff00009793fb50 (&ctrl->tx_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: qcom_slim_ngd_ssr_pdr_notify (drivers/slimbus/qcom-ngd-ctrl.c:1475) slim_qcom_ngd_ctrl which lock already depends on the new lock. Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(&ctrl->tx_lock); lock(&ctrl->lock); lock(&ctrl->tx_lock); lock(&ctrl->lock); The assumption is that the comment refers to the desire to not call qcom_slim_ngd_exit_dma() while we have an ongoing DMA TX transaction. But any such transaction is initiated and completed within a single qcom_slim_ngd_xfer_msg(). Prior to calling qcom_slim_ngd_exit_dma() the slim_controller is torn down, all child devices are notified that the slimbus is gone and the child devices are removed. Stop taking the tx_lock in qcom_slim_ngd_ssr_pdr_notify() to avoid the deadlock. | |
| Title | slimbus: qcom-ngd-ctrl: Avoid ABBA on tx_lock/ctrl->lock | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
|
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-07-01T13:32:15.733Z
Reserved: 2026-06-09T07:44:35.398Z
Link: CVE-2026-53331
No data.
No data.
No data.
OpenCVE Enrichment
No data.
Weaknesses
No weakness.