CVE-2024-46848
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: perf/x86/intel: Limit the period on Haswell Running the ltp test cve-2015-3290 concurrently reports the following warnings. perfevents: irq loop stuck! WARNING: CPU: 31 PID: 32438 at arch/x86/events/intel/core.c:3174 intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x285/0x370 Call Trace: <NMI> ? __warn+0xa4/0x220 ? intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x285/0x370 ? __report_bug+0x123/0x130 ? intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x285/0x370 ? __report_bug+0x123/0x130 ? intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x285/0x370 ? report_bug+0x3e/0xa0 ? handle_bug+0x3c/0x70 ? exc_invalid_op+0x18/0x50 ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 ? irq_work_claim+0x1e/0x40 ? intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x285/0x370 perf_event_nmi_handler+0x3d/0x60 nmi_handle+0x104/0x330 Thanks to Thomas Gleixner's analysis, the issue is caused by the low initial period (1) of the frequency estimation algorithm, which triggers the defects of the HW, specifically erratum HSW11 and HSW143. (For the details, please refer https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87plq9l5d2.ffs@tglx/) The HSW11 requires a period larger than 100 for the INST_RETIRED.ALL event, but the initial period in the freq mode is 1. The erratum is the same as the BDM11, which has been supported in the kernel. A minimum period of 128 is enforced as well on HSW. HSW143 is regarding that the fixed counter 1 may overcount 32 with the Hyper-Threading is enabled. However, based on the test, the hardware has more issues than it tells. Besides the fixed counter 1, the message 'interrupt took too long' can be observed on any counter which was armed with a period < 32 and two events expired in the same NMI. A minimum period of 32 is enforced for the rest of the events. The recommended workaround code of the HSW143 is not implemented. Because it only addresses the issue for the fixed counter. It brings extra overhead through extra MSR writing. No related overcounting issue has been reported so far.
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>= 3.11, < 6.1.110>= 6.2, < 6.6.51>= 6.7, < 6.10.10= 6.11CVSS 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 · scoped6.1.1106.6.516.10.10
6.1.110 (for 6.1.x) or 6.6.51 (for 6.2-6.6.x) or 6.10.10 (for 6.7-6.11.x)
- Identify the currently running kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which branch of the affected versions your kernel falls into (6.1.x, 6.2-6.6.x, 6.7-6.11.x)
- Upgrade to the first fixed version in that branch: 6.1.110 for 6.1.x, 6.6.51 for 6.2-6.6.x, or 6.10.10 for 6.7-6.11.x
- Update the kernel package using your distribution's package manager (e.g., `apt update && apt upgrade linux-image`, `yum update kernel`, or `dnf upgrade kernel`)
- Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version with `uname -r` and confirming it matches the target fixed version
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-2024-46848 — 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-2024-46848 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