Vulnerability Database

413,619

Total vulnerabilities in the database

CVE-2026-99248

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

i2c: xiic: restore non-managed runtime PM to fix clk WARN flood

The devres conversion replaced manual pm_runtime_enable()/disable() with devm_pm_runtime_set_active_enabled() and dropped the remove-time runtime PM teardown. The managed release tears runtime PM down in the wrong order: it calls pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() before pm_runtime_disable(), i.e. while runtime PM is still enabled, and devres is LIFO so the devm_clk_get_enabled() release runs afterwards.

At remove(), pm_runtime_put_sync() leaves the device active with the autosuspend timer armed. Clearing use_autosuspend then makes rpm_idle() suspend immediately, and xiic_i2c_runtime_suspend() clk_disable()s the clock. The later devm_clk_get_enabled() release clk_disable_unprepare()s the already-disabled clock, so clk_core_disable() WARNs ("clkN already disabled") on every teardown.

Drop the managed helper and restore the non-managed runtime PM setup and teardown, so runtime PM is enabled once in probe and disabled once in remove and the clock enable count stays balanced.

Order the remove teardown so runtime PM is disabled before the usage count is dropped: pm_runtime_disable() followed by pm_runtime_put_noidle() instead of pm_runtime_put_sync(). Dropping the count first with autosuspend still enabled arms the autosuspend timer, and a preemption before pm_runtime_disable() lets it expire, suspend the device and clk_disable() the clock, which the devm release then disables again - the same WARN.

Restore the non-managed IRQ request as well. The probe error paths now unwind runtime PM by hand via goto, and a devm-registered handler is only freed later during devres unwind, so it would stay live across the manual teardown (and across any future failing step added after it). Request the IRQ with request_threaded_irq() and free it explicitly in the probe error path and in remove. The probe error path also clears use_autosuspend, to match the teardown in remove().

  • Published: Nov 3, 2026
  • Updated: Nov 8, 2026
  • CVE: CVE-2026-99248
  • Exploit:
  • CISA KEV:

No technical information available.

No CWE or OWASP classifications available.

Is CVE-2026-99248 exposed on your perimeter?

A vulnerability database tells you what is broken. Attack surface management tells you where it is running: it discovers your internet-facing assets and flags the ones affected by issues like this one.

What is attack surface management? →

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.