Back to CVE records
Not yet scoredPublished Sep 11, 2026

CVE-2026-89757mm/mglru: fix and remove redundant unevictable folio handling

Updated under an hour ago ()

Does this affect you?

It affects Linux. Add what you run to find out whether that includes you.

No exploitation reported and no EPSS estimate yet.

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/mglru: fix and remove redundant unevictable folio handling sort_folio() has a shortcut for moving folios that are no longer evictable but are still sitting on a generation list. However, this shortcut is buggy. It does not follow the PG_lru usage convention, and it has a more serious issue. Unevictable folios are not threaded on lists[LRU_UNEVICTABLE], so that folio->lru can be reused to hold folio->mlock_count (see the comment in lruvec_init()). Hence lruvec_add_folio() skips the list_add() for them, and every other place that turns a folio unevictable initialises mlock_count explicitly: lru_add() sets it to 0, __mlock_folio() and __mlock_new_folio() set it to !!folio_test_mlocked(folio). sort_folio() sets nothing, and the lru_gen_del_folio() right above it may have already poisoned folio->lru via list_del(), so mlock_count ends up aliasing LIST_POISON2, which reads as 0x122, i.e. 290. The result is user visible. On munlock, __munlock_folio() decrements that bogus count, finds it still non-zero and bails out before clearing PG_mlocked, so the folio remains unevictable and the Mlocked accounting stays inflated until the folio is freed. The shortcut also touches the LRU flags in the wrong order. It calls lru_gen_del_folio() while PG_lru is still set, so a concurrent folio_test_clear_lru() (e.g. compaction, folio_isolate_lru()) can succeed on a folio that has already been taken off the generation list, which may lead to unexpected behavior. So fix it by isolating them as common folios and letting the generic shrink path cull them. This matches the classical LRU behavior, and there should be no visible effect on the generic eviction or isolation behavior. There is no performance concern either, such a folio goes through this once, and then it is off the generation lists for good.

CVSS
Not yet scored
Weakness (CWE)
Not given
Known exploited
Not in CISA's KEV catalog
EPSS (exploitation in the next 30 days)
Not loaded for this CVE
Assigned by
Linux
NVD analysis
Received
Record last updated
Sep 11, 2026
First seen by InfoSec Signals
Oct 9, 2026

Affected products

Affected products
Linux Linux
linux:linux (from the name)
from ac35a490237446b71e3b4b782b1596967edd0aa8 before 54a58d6656dd403b686b247f0bad8507cbfb45df; from ac35a490237446b71e3b4b782b1596967edd0aa8 before 15d3a2a71c8bf7333d019d249ee33669e69e4275; from ac35a490237446b71e3b4b782b1596967edd0aa8 before f7e698e326b239a91ea15844817551921209e826
CNA record

References

The CVE record is authoritative. Products marked “from the name” were identified from the CNA's free-text names, not a CPE, and are matched less certainly. This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.

Your cookie choices
We use essential cookies to run this site, and, only with your consent, an advertising cookie from Google to measure whether our ads lead to sign-ups and subscriptions. See our for details.