Answer in brief
CVE-2022-49963 records a High severity (CVSS 7.8) vulnerability in drm/i915/ttm: fix CCS handling. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
CVSS is 7.8. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Product | Affected versions | Fixed versions |
|---|---|---|
| cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | Not reported | Not reported |
| cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.0:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:* | Not reported | Not reported |
| cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.0:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:* | Not reported | Not reported |
| cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.0:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:* | Not reported | Not reported |
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| Linux/Linuxgeneric | >=da0595ae91da837929a00470ab40546090e5b9ae <97434cb55bd884bd268626ec41489f79b261b2d4 || >=da0595ae91da837929a00470ab40546090e5b9ae <8d905254162965c8e6be697d82c7dbf5d08f574d | 97434cb55bd884bd268626ec41489f79b261b2d4, 8d905254162965c8e6be697d82c7dbf5d08f574d |
| Linux/Linuxgeneric | 5.19 | Not reported |
Published upstream
Jun 18, 2025
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Oct 15, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 4, 2026
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/i915/ttm: fix CCS handling Crucible + recent Mesa seems to sometimes hit: GEM_BUG_ON(num_ccs_blks > NUM_CCS_BLKS_PER_XFER) And it looks like we can also trigger this with gem_lmem_swapping, if we modify the test to use slightly larger object sizes. Looking closer it looks like we have the following issues in migrate_copy(): - We are using plain integer in various places, which we can easily overflow with a large object. - We pass the entire object size (when the src is lmem) into emit_pte() and then try to copy it, which doesn't work, since we only have a few fixed sized windows in which to map the pages and perform the copy. With an object > 8M we therefore aren't properly copying the pages. And then with an object > 64M we trigger the GEM_BUG_ON(num_ccs_blks > NUM_CCS_BLKS_PER_XFER). So it looks like our copy handling for any object > 8M (which is our CHUNK_SZ) is currently broken on DG2. Testcase: igt@gem_lmem_swapping (cherry picked from commit 8676145eb2f53a9940ff70910caf0125bd8a4bc2)
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.