Vulnerability Database

356,688

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2026-31733 — linux / linux_kernel

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

sched_ext: Fix stale direct dispatch state in ddsp_dsq_id

@p->scx.ddsp_dsq_id can be left set (non-SCX_DSQ_INVALID) triggering a spurious warning in mark_direct_dispatch() when the next wakeup's ops.select_cpu() calls scx_bpf_dsq_insert(), such as:

WARNING: kernel/sched/ext.c:1273 at scx_dsq_insert_commit+0xcd/0x140

The root cause is that ddsp_dsq_id was only cleared in dispatch_enqueue(), which is not reached in all paths that consume or cancel a direct dispatch verdict.

Fix it by clearing it at the right places:

  • direct_dispatch(): cache the direct dispatch state in local variables and clear it before dispatch_enqueue() on the synchronous path. For the deferred path, the direct dispatch state must remain set until process_ddsp_deferred_locals() consumes them.

  • process_ddsp_deferred_locals(): cache the dispatch state in local variables and clear it before calling dispatch_to_local_dsq(), which may migrate the task to another rq.

  • do_enqueue_task(): clear the dispatch state on the enqueue path (local/global/bypass fallbacks), where the direct dispatch verdict is ignored.

  • dequeue_task_scx(): clear the dispatch state after dispatch_dequeue() to handle both the deferred dispatch cancellation and the holding_cpu race, covering all cases where a pending direct dispatch is cancelled.

  • scx_disable_task(): clear the direct dispatch state when transitioning a task out of the current scheduler. Waking tasks may have had the direct dispatch state set by the outgoing scheduler's ops.select_cpu() and then been queued on a wake_list via ttwu_queue_wakelist(), when SCX_OPS_ALLOW_QUEUED_WAKEUP is set. Such tasks are not on the runqueue and are not iterated by scx_bypass(), so their direct dispatch state won't be cleared. Without this clear, any subsequent SCX scheduler that tries to direct dispatch the task will trigger the WARN_ON_ONCE() in mark_direct_dispatch().

  • Published: May 1, 2026
  • Updated: May 8, 2026
  • CVE: CVE-2026-31733
  • Severity: Medium
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

CVSS v3:

  • Severity: Medium
  • Score: 5.5
  • AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

No CWE or OWASP classifications available.

Frequently Asked Questions

A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.

CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.

A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.

Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.

Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.

SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.