CVE-2022-49783
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: x86/fpu: Drop fpregs lock before inheriting FPU permissions Mike Galbraith reported the following against an old fork of preempt-rt but the same issue also applies to the current preempt-rt tree. BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:46 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 0, non_block: 0, pid: 1, name: systemd preempt_count: 1, expected: 0 RCU nest depth: 0, expected: 0 Preemption disabled at: fpu_clone CPU: 6 PID: 1 Comm: systemd Tainted: G E (unreleased) Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl ? fpu_clone __might_resched rt_spin_lock fpu_clone ? copy_thread ? copy_process ? shmem_alloc_inode ? kmem_cache_alloc ? kernel_clone ? __do_sys_clone ? do_syscall_64 ? __x64_sys_rt_sigprocmask ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode ? do_syscall_64 ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode ? do_syscall_64 ? syscall_exit_to_user_mode ? do_syscall_64 ? exc_page_fault ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe </TASK> Mike says: The splat comes from fpu_inherit_perms() being called under fpregs_lock(), and us reaching the spin_lock_irq() therein due to fpu_state_size_dynamic() returning true despite static key __fpu_state_size_dynamic having never been enabled. Mike's assessment looks correct. fpregs_lock on a PREEMPT_RT kernel disables preemption so calling spin_lock_irq() in fpu_inherit_perms() is unsafe. This problem exists since commit 9e798e9aa14c ("x86/fpu: Prepare fpu_clone() for dynamically enabled features"). Even though the original bug report should not have enabled the paths at all, the bug still exists. fpregs_lock is necessary when editing the FPU registers or a task's FP state but it is not necessary for fpu_inherit_perms(). The only write of any FP state in fpu_inherit_perms() is for the new child which is not running yet and cannot context switch or be borrowed by a kernel thread yet. Hence, fpregs_lock is not protecting anything in the new child until clone() completes and can be dropped earlier. The siglock still needs to be acquired by fpu_inherit_perms() as the read of the parent's permissions has to be serialised. [ bp: Cleanup splat. ]
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 5.16, < 6.0.10= 6.1CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped6.0.10
Linux Kernel 6.0.10+ or 6.2+
- 1. Identify current kernel version using `uname -r`
- 2. Check if system is running a PREEMPT_RT (real-time) kernel variant using `uname -v` or checking /boot/config-*
- 3. If running affected version (< 6.0.10 or = 6.1), plan kernel upgrade
- 4. For production systems, test the new kernel in a staging environment before deploying
- 5. Upgrade to kernel version 6.0.10 or later, or 6.2 or later to receive the fix
- 6. After upgrade, verify the fix is present by checking the kernel commit history or using `modinfo fpu` or examining vmlinux for the commit
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-49783 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2022-49783 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data