CVEPublished 2026-05-27Modified 2026-06-240 articles on news5 live referencesNVD data

CVE-2026-45907Linux · Linux_kernel

Vulnerability data via NVD (ingested)

CVSS v3.1
5.5
MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
EPSS percentile
10
Exploit Prediction Scoring System · top 90% of all CVEs
Weaknesses (CWE)
Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/mlx5e: Fix deadlocks between devlink and netdev instance locks In the mentioned "Fixes" commit, various work tasks triggering devlink health reporter recovery were switched to use netdev_trylock to protect against concurrent tear down of the channels being recovered. But this had the side effect of introducing potential deadlocks because of incorrect lock ordering. The correct lock order is described by the init flow: probe_one -> mlx5_init_one (acquires devlink lock) -> mlx5_init_one_devl_locked -> mlx5_register_device -> mlx5_rescan_drivers_locked -...-> mlx5e_probe -> _mlx5e_probe -> register_netdev (acquires rtnl lock) -> register_netdevice (acquires netdev lock) => devlink lock -> rtnl lock -> netdev lock. But in the current recovery flow, the order is wrong: mlx5e_tx_err_cqe_work (acquires netdev lock) -> mlx5e_reporter_tx_err_cqe -> mlx5e_health_report -> devlink_health_report (acquires devlink lock => boom!) -> devlink_health_reporter_recover -> mlx5e_tx_reporter_recover -> mlx5e_tx_reporter_recover_from_ctx -> mlx5e_tx_reporter_err_cqe_recover The same pattern exists in: mlx5e_reporter_rx_timeout mlx5e_reporter_tx_ptpsq_unhealthy mlx5e_reporter_tx_timeout Fix these by moving the netdev_trylock calls from the work handlers lower in the call stack, in the respective recovery functions, where they are actually necessary.

Timeline
Published 2026-05-27
Modified 2026-06-24

External references

Search for exposed instances

Shodan + Censys queries derived from NVD's CPE data. The vuln tag catches assets Shodan has explicitly linked to this CVE; the product / banner fingerprints find exposed instances even when the vuln tag was never applied (which is common).

More intel sources (5)

Known PoCs on GitHub (1)

We haven't classified any articles referencing CVE-2026-45907 yet. The external references above still apply.