Answer in brief
CVE-2026-72314 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in regulator: core: regulator_lock_two() should test for EDEADLK not EDEADLOCK. 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.
Answer in brief
CVE-2026-72314 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in regulator: core: regulator_lock_two() should test for EDEADLK not EDEADLOCK. 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.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. 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.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| Linux/Linuxgeneric | >=06140d6dfe720d80566f792b4e28a9cd60a67970 <dc804f390fddd9c389edf0976356942e16878d8f || >=1e3056b8067c2e9b7741c4e588f0acacbe4bdafc <8e39aa63798ea0a797fd9341419f12ef91df3238 || >=849ab4cf182b38e562ffcc1b494d510e948822dd <0c305eac40470a224671858a215963b070f9b2a9 || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <29a7953e9adea6c7f9e64947745b79158e7cea7f || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <e2063307ea3b6da74585129ba7b588e8243e2ef0 || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <346e2d666a29ae7233c56b356a0487eb1d42589b || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <153d1b8b5bc30847eb70ad535f62f289aa9217e6 || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <d38f8bd771c4999b797d7074b348cf201414bd34 || 5224ea575196db11c0a909a78ea426ccdb92f064 || 435c65af581a61ca249bd8f717c3a147dc119f11 || cdc042430ea9e07f77ce05a9d29e227dbdecc733 || >=5.10.180 <5.10.261 || >=5.15.111 <5.15.212 || >=6.1.28 <6.1.178 || >=5.4.243 <5.5 || >=6.2.15 <6.3 || >=6.3.2 <6.4 | dc804f390fddd9c389edf0976356942e16878d8f, 8e39aa63798ea0a797fd9341419f12ef91df3238, 0c305eac40470a224671858a215963b070f9b2a9, 29a7953e9adea6c7f9e64947745b79158e7cea7f, e2063307ea3b6da74585129ba7b588e8243e2ef0, 346e2d666a29ae7233c56b356a0487eb1d42589b, 153d1b8b5bc30847eb70ad535f62f289aa9217e6, d38f8bd771c4999b797d7074b348cf201414bd34, 5.10.261, 5.15.212, 6.1.178, 5.5, 6.3, 6.4 |
| Linux/Linuxgeneric | 6.4 | Not reported |
Published upstream
Aug 15, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Aug 15, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 15, 2026
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: regulator: core: regulator_lock_two() should test for EDEADLK not EDEADLOCK Compare against -EDEADLK, which is what ww_mutex_lock() actually returns and what every other deadlock check in this file already uses. Function regulator_lock_two() acquires two regulators via regulator_lock_nested() -> ww_mutex_lock(). On contention, ww_mutex_lock() returns -EDEADLK, which is the caller's signal to drop the lock it holds and retry the acquisition in the canonical order. However, regulator_lock_two() tests the return value against -EDEADLOCK rather than -EDEADLK. On most architectures, EDEADLK and EDEADLOCK are the same value, so the comparison happens to be correct and the bug is invisible. But on MIPS, SPARC, and PowerPC, those two errors have different values. The test is wrong: a genuine -EDEADLK backoff no longer matches -EDEADLOCK, so instead of unlocking and retrying, the code falls into WARN_ON(ret) and returns with only one of the two regulators locked. In practice, this is a bug only on MIPS, because the regulator core is not built or used on the other two platforms. In general, EDEADLK is preferred over EDEADLOCK for new code.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. 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.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| Linux/Linuxgeneric | >=06140d6dfe720d80566f792b4e28a9cd60a67970 <dc804f390fddd9c389edf0976356942e16878d8f || >=1e3056b8067c2e9b7741c4e588f0acacbe4bdafc <8e39aa63798ea0a797fd9341419f12ef91df3238 || >=849ab4cf182b38e562ffcc1b494d510e948822dd <0c305eac40470a224671858a215963b070f9b2a9 || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <29a7953e9adea6c7f9e64947745b79158e7cea7f || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <e2063307ea3b6da74585129ba7b588e8243e2ef0 || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <346e2d666a29ae7233c56b356a0487eb1d42589b || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <153d1b8b5bc30847eb70ad535f62f289aa9217e6 || >=cba6cfdc7c3f1516f0d08ddfb24e689af0932573 <d38f8bd771c4999b797d7074b348cf201414bd34 || 5224ea575196db11c0a909a78ea426ccdb92f064 || 435c65af581a61ca249bd8f717c3a147dc119f11 || cdc042430ea9e07f77ce05a9d29e227dbdecc733 || >=5.10.180 <5.10.261 || >=5.15.111 <5.15.212 || >=6.1.28 <6.1.178 || >=5.4.243 <5.5 || >=6.2.15 <6.3 || >=6.3.2 <6.4 | dc804f390fddd9c389edf0976356942e16878d8f, 8e39aa63798ea0a797fd9341419f12ef91df3238, 0c305eac40470a224671858a215963b070f9b2a9, 29a7953e9adea6c7f9e64947745b79158e7cea7f, e2063307ea3b6da74585129ba7b588e8243e2ef0, 346e2d666a29ae7233c56b356a0487eb1d42589b, 153d1b8b5bc30847eb70ad535f62f289aa9217e6, d38f8bd771c4999b797d7074b348cf201414bd34, 5.10.261, 5.15.212, 6.1.178, 5.5, 6.3, 6.4 |
| Linux/Linuxgeneric | 6.4 | Not reported |
Published upstream
Aug 15, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Aug 15, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 15, 2026
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: regulator: core: regulator_lock_two() should test for EDEADLK not EDEADLOCK Compare against -EDEADLK, which is what ww_mutex_lock() actually returns and what every other deadlock check in this file already uses. Function regulator_lock_two() acquires two regulators via regulator_lock_nested() -> ww_mutex_lock(). On contention, ww_mutex_lock() returns -EDEADLK, which is the caller's signal to drop the lock it holds and retry the acquisition in the canonical order. However, regulator_lock_two() tests the return value against -EDEADLOCK rather than -EDEADLK. On most architectures, EDEADLK and EDEADLOCK are the same value, so the comparison happens to be correct and the bug is invisible. But on MIPS, SPARC, and PowerPC, those two errors have different values. The test is wrong: a genuine -EDEADLK backoff no longer matches -EDEADLOCK, so instead of unlocking and retrying, the code falls into WARN_ON(ret) and returns with only one of the two regulators locked. In practice, this is a bug only on MIPS, because the regulator core is not built or used on the other two platforms. In general, EDEADLK is preferred over EDEADLOCK for new code.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.