HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members
  • Sponsor HOL
  • Advertise with HOL

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorFund agreed research, implementation and shared testing through the HOL Partner Program.
  • AdvertiseCompare README logo placements, previews and monthly prices, or promote a plugin or extension.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 89517 schedext fix rq corepick corruption under core
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Sponsor
  • Advertise
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Unknown severity · Source severity not reportedCVE-2026-89517

sched_ext: Fix rq->core_pick corruption under core schedulingCVE-2026-89517

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-89517 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in sched_ext: Fix rq->core_pick corruption under core scheduling. 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.

Published Sep 11, 2026Updated Oct 19, 2026Source checked Oct 27, 2026First seen by HOL Sep 11, 2026Material review Oct 19, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Unknown severitySource severity not reported
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
2 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

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.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps Linux/Linux (generic), Linux/Linux (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
Linux/Linuxgeneric>=4c95380701f58b8112f0b891de8d160e4199e19d <cdafb68155bee2d5c4e50c12e4606323e9334e6b || >=4c95380701f58b8112f0b891de8d160e4199e19d <d954004205c1a1d3f59ce8482b559266c15600facdafb68155bee2d5c4e50c12e4606323e9334e6b, d954004205c1a1d3f59ce8482b559266c15600fa
Linux/Linuxgeneric6.19Not reported

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Linux/Linux, Linux/Linux.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Linux/Linux to cdafb68155bee2d5c4e50c12e4606323e9334e6b if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Sep 11, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Oct 19, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Sep 11, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
  • Source referencegit.kernel.org
Upstream source description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched_ext: Fix rq->core_pick corruption under core scheduling Core scheduling's pick_next_task() picks what to run on every SMT sibling of the core in a single pass under the shared core-wide rq lock. The selection state is consistent only while the lock is held continuously, so ->pick_task() originally could not release it. However, since 4c95380701f5 ("sched/ext: Fold balance_scx() into pick_task_scx()"), sched_ext runs dispatch from inside the pick and dispatching can drop the rq lock. To support this, pick_next_task() has been updated to restart the whole selection when a pick returns RETRY_TASK after releasing the lock. When selections on the same core interleave through the dropped lock, they corrupt each other's state: one clears the other's rq->core_pick leading to a NULL deref, or invalidates its keep-the-previous-task decision leaving a dequeued task running, which deadlocks the next wakeup and matches the reported hard hangs. A cookied ping-pong load on an SMT machine makes the interleavings frequent and kills the kernel within seconds. Fix it by making the pick return RETRY_TASK whenever dispatch released the rq lock, so that a selection only ever commits picks made under a continuously held lock. The previous patch's rq->scx.lock_drop_seq counts the releases. A dispatch that touched nothing never releases the lock and its verdict, including "nothing to run", stands: retries are bounded, each following a dispatch that actually did something, and an idle CPU does not loop. If another dispatch is already in flight on the rq, skip dispatching and pick from what is already queued locally - the in-flight dispatch has released the lock, so its own selection will retry and re-pick this rq, while returning RETRY_TASK here would only spin on the lock that dispatch needs to finish. Balance callbacks must run in the context that queued them, so they can only be queued on the CPU's own rq. When dispatching for another rq, run the deferred work directly instead - that rq may consume all its picks through the core-sched fast path and never queue the callback itself. The put_prev_task_scx() warning about a runnable task being left behind assumed that dispatch ran as part of the very pick that is switching away. That now only holds on the non-core path, so gate it and drop the cookie-match test, which is always true without core scheduling, from its condition.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Record context

Vulnerability class
Vulnerability
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
Not reported
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 27, 2026
References
2 linked sources
Open source record