Home/CVE/In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/huge_memory: use correct flags for device privat
CVE

CVE-2026-53155

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/huge_memory: use correct flags for device privat

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/huge_memory: use correct flags for device private PMD entry Commit 65edfda6f3f2 ("mm/rmap: extend rmap and migration support device-private entries") updated set_pmd_migration_entry() to use pmdp_huge_get_and_clear() in the softleaf case, but made no further adjustments to the function itself. Therefore this function continues to incorrectly use pmd_write(), pmd_soft_dirty() and pmd_uffd_wp() to determine whether the installed migration entry should be marked writable, softdirty or uffd-wp respectively. Whilst all are incorrect, the most problematic of these is pmd_write(), as this can lead to corrupted rmap state.

On x86-64 _PAGE_SWP_SOFT_DIRTY is aliased to _PAGE_RW. So calling pmd_write() on a softleaf will return the softdirty state encoded in the entry, assuming CONFIG_MEM_SOFT_DIRTY was enabled. This was observed when running the hmm.hmm_device_private.anon_write_child selftest: 1.

The test faults in a range then migrates it such that a device-private THP range is established. 2. The parent then migrates it to a device-private writable PMD entry whose folio is entirely AnonExclusive with entire_mapcount=1, softdirty set (accidentally correct write state). 3. The parent forks and the PMD entries are set to device-private read only entries, entire_mapcount=2, softdirty still set. 4. [BUG] The child writes to the range then migrates to RAM - intending to install non-writable migration entries - but replacing parent and child PMD mappings with WRITABLE entries due to misinterpreting the softdirty bit. 5.

In remove_migration_pmd(), if !softleaf_is_migration_read(entry) we set the RMAP_EXCLUSIVE flag when calling folio_add_anon_rmap_pmd() for both parent and child, which are therefore AnonExclusive. 6. [SPLAT] Child sets migrated folio entire_mapcount=1, parent sets entire_mapcount=2 and we end up with an AnonExclusive folio with entire_mapcount=2! Assert fires in __folio_add_anon_rmap(): VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_large(folio) && folio_entire_mapcount(folio) > 1 && PageAnonExclusive(cur_page), folio) This patch fixes the issue by correctly referencing the softleaf entry fields for writable, softdirty and uffd-wp in set_pmd_migration_entry(). It also only updates A/D flags if the entry is present as these are otherwise not meaningful for a softleaf entry.

This patch also flips the if (!present) { ... } else { ... } logic in set_pmd_migration_entry() so it is easier to understand, and adds some comments to make things clearer. I was able to bisect this to commit 775465fd26a3 ("lib/test_hmm: add zone device private THP test infrastructure") which first exposes this bug as it was the commit that permitted test_hmm to generate the test. However commit 65edfda6f3f2 ("mm/rmap: extend rmap and migration support device-private entries") is the commit that actually enabled this behaviour.

EPSS 0.00172
EPSS exploitation odds0.17% · top 93%
Monitor
  • ⚠ NVD has not scored this CVE yet - manual triage required (common for recent CVEs)
Sigma rules0 YARA rules0
Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots
How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch
This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-53155, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.
Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:
CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked. EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal. CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score. Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.
How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.
Then what - two workflows:
Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits. PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.
Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).

Severity & exploitation scoring

EPSS exploitation probability
0.17%
Top 93%odds of exploitation in the next 30 days
CVSS metric silhouette
No structured CVSS vector for this CVE. Older entries often have only a numeric base score - the metric breakdown radar requires a full AV:_/AC:_/... vector string published by NVD.
SSVC triage
No SSVC vulnrichment for this CVE. CISA's Vulnrichment program scores newer CVEs (~2024 onwards) plus selected older critical ones. Use the EPSS probability + KEV status to triage instead.
🔗

References & Sources

2
Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.