CVE-2026-52987
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: drm/amdgpu: avoid double drm_exec_fini() in userq validate When new_addition is true, amdgpu_userq_vm_validate() calls drm_exec_fini(&exec) before iterating over the collected HMM ranges and calling amdgpu_ttm_tt_get_user_pages(). If amdgpu_ttm_tt_get_user_pages() fails in that path, the code jumps to unlock_all and calls drm_exec_fini(&exec) a second time on the same exec object. drm_exec_fini() is not idempotent: it frees exec->objects and may also drop exec->contended and finalize the ww acquire context. Route that error path directly to the range cleanup once exec has already been finalized. Issue found using a prototype static analysis tool and confirmed by code review. (cherry picked from commit 2802952e4a07306da6ebe813ff1acacc5691851a)
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 analysis · high confidenceA double-free vulnerability in the AMDGPU driver where drm_exec_fini() is incorrectly called twice on the same exec object when amdgpu_ttm_tt_get_user_pages() fails in the new_addition code path. The first call occurs before iteration, and the error handler jumps to unlock_all which calls it again. Since drm_exec_fini() is not idempotent and frees exec->objects, this leads to use-after-free conditions.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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>= 6.19, < 7.0.10= 7.1CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check kernel versionRun 'uname -r' or 'cat /proc/version' to obtain the running kernel versionAffected if The kernel version is >= 6.19 and < 7.0.10, or exactly 7.1
-
Verify amdgpu driver is loadedRun 'lsmod | grep amdgpu' or check '/sys/module/amdgpu/version' if availableAffected if The amdgpu kernel module is loaded in memory
-
Check for amdgpu device filesRun 'ls -la /dev/dri/card*' and check if any cards use the amdgpu driver via 'cat /sys/class/drm/card*/device/driver'Affected if AMD GPU devices managed by the amdgpu driver are present and active
-
Identify user queue (userq) functionality usageSearch kernel logs or monitoring for amdgpu userq-related operations - check for 'amdgpu_userq' references in dmesg or system logsAffected if The amdgpu user queue (userq) functionality is being used, which triggers the vulnerable code path in amdgpu_userq_vm_validate()
-
Review driver source for vulnerable functionIf access to the kernel source is available, verify that amdgpu_userq_vm_validate() contains the double drm_exec_fini() pattern by examining the function logicAffected if The installed amdgpu driver code contains the non-idempotent drm_exec_fini() call pattern in the error path
A system is affected if it runs a kernel version in the range >= 6.19 and < 7.0.10 (or 7.1), has the amdgpu driver loaded, and uses AMD GPU hardware with user queue functionality enabled.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 · scoped7.0.10
Apply the kernel patch from the upstream commit (2802952e4a07306da6ebe813ff1acacc5691851a) which routes the error path directly to range cleanup instead of unlock_all to avoid the second drm_exec_fini() call. Update Linux kernel to the patched version.
Linux Kernel 7.0.10 or later stable release
- Identify the current running kernel version using `uname -r`
- Check if the installed version is affected: version >= 6.19 and < 7.0.10, or exactly 7.1
- If affected, upgrade to kernel version 7.0.10 or later, or the latest stable kernel branch (e.g., 7.x series if available)
- Reboot into the updated kernel to apply the fix
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the amdgpu driver code at drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_userq.c for the corrected error handling path
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-52987 — 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-2026-52987 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