CVE-2026-23207

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

spi: tegra210-quad: Protect curr_xfer check in IRQ handler

Now that all other accesses to curr_xfer are done under the lock, protect the curr_xfer NULL check in tegra_qspi_isr_thread() with the spinlock. Without this protection, the following race can occur:

CPU0 (ISR thread) CPU1 (timeout path)

if (!tqspi->curr_xfer) // sees non-NULL spin_lock() tqspi->curr_xfer = NULL spin_unlock() handle_*_xfer() spin_lock() t = tqspi->curr_xfer // NULL! … t->len … // NULL dereference!

With this patch, all curr_xfer accesses are now properly synchronized.

Although all accesses to curr_xfer are done under the lock, in tegra_qspi_isr_thread() it checks for NULL, releases the lock and reacquires it later in handle_cpu_based_xfer()/handle_dma_based_xfer(). There is a potential for an update in between, which could cause a NULL pointer dereference.

To handle this, add a NULL check inside the handlers after acquiring the lock. This ensures that if the timeout path has already cleared curr_xfer, the handler will safely return without dereferencing the NULL pointer.

Weakness

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

Affected Software

Extended Description

A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and it is effectively a property of a code sequence. Depending on the context, a code sequence may be in the form of a function call, a small number of instructions, a series of program invocations, etc. A race condition violates these properties, which are closely related:

A race condition exists when an “interfering code sequence” can still access the shared resource, violating exclusivity. The interfering code sequence could be “trusted” or “untrusted.” A trusted interfering code sequence occurs within the product; it cannot be modified by the attacker, and it can only be invoked indirectly. An untrusted interfering code sequence can be authored directly by the attacker, and typically it is external to the vulnerable product.

Potential Mitigations

• Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring.
• Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/26.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/29.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2ac3a105e51496147c0e44e49466eecfcc532d57
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/edf9088b6e1d6d88982db7eb5e736a0e4fbcc09e