# CVE-2026-99184: accel/rocket: search every core slot when a core is removed


- **Severity:** Not scored
- **Exploited in the wild:** Not known
- **Fix available:** Yes
- **Published:** 28 Oct 2026
- **Updated:** 28 Oct 2026
- **Also known as:** BELL-CVE-2026-99184, DEBIAN-CVE-2026-99184, GHSA-fqrq-qcw6-wmqq, UBUNTU-CVE-2026-99184

## What is CVE-2026-99184?

CVE-2026-99184 is a vulnerability in Linux, published on 28 Oct 2026. 

### Official description

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

accel/rocket: search every core slot when a core is removed

rocket_remove() decrements rdev->num_cores for each core it removes,
while find_core_for_dev() searches slots 0 to num_cores - 1. Unbinding
the cores in the order they were bound therefore loses the last one: by
the time it is removed the search range has already shrunk past its
slot, so find_core_for_dev() returns -1 and rocket_remove() gives up
without doing anything.

num_cores never reaches zero, rocket_device_fini() never runs, and the
file-scoped rdev keeps pointing at a device that is going away. Binding
the cores again starts from that stale count, because rocket_probe()
takes rdev->num_cores as the slot to fill. On an RK3588, which describes
three cores, the second round lands on slots 1, 2 and 3 while rdev->cores
was allocated with room for three:

  rocket fdab0000.npu: Rockchip NPU core 1 version: 1179210309
  rocket fdac0000.npu: Rockchip NPU core 2 version: 1179210309
  rocket fdad0000.npu: Rockchip NPU core 3 version: 1179210309

The write to rdev->cores[3] is past the end of the array.

Nothing in tree reads the core array often enough to notice, so the
overrun is silent today. It turned up while testing a devfreq series on
top of this, where a worker walks every core a few times a second, and
UBSAN caught the first bool it read out of the overrun entry:

  UBSAN: invalid-load in drivers/accel/rocket/rocket_devfreq.c:47:10
  load of value 5 is not a valid value for type '_Bool'
  Workqueue: devfreq_wq devfreq_monitor

Record how many slots were allocated and search all of them. Every core
is then found on removal, num_cores reaches zero, the device is torn down
and a later bind starts from a clean rdev.

This does not make unbinding a single core out of several work. probe
still takes num_cores as the slot to fill, so rebinding one core while
its siblings stay bound would write over a slot that is already in use,
and rocket_open() still reaches for cores[0] whether or not anything is
there. Both of those want more thought than a fix should carry.

Found by unbinding and rebinding all three cores on an Orange Pi 5 Plus.
With this applied, 25 unbind/rebind rounds and 5 module unload/reload
rounds run clean there: the cores land in slots 0, 1 and 2 every time,
whichever order they are bound in, and the shared supply goes back to a
single user after each round.

## Which versions are affected by CVE-2026-99184?


## How do I fix CVE-2026-99184?

Upgrade to a fixed version.

## Is CVE-2026-99184 being exploited?

There is no known exploitation of CVE-2026-99184 in the wild and no public exploit code.

## Fix prompt for AI coding agents

```text
Check this codebase for CVE-2026-99184 and fix it if it is affected.

What it is: CVE-2026-99184 is a vulnerability in Linux, published on 28 Oct 2026. 
Exploitation: There is no known exploitation of CVE-2026-99184 in the wild and no public exploit code.

Affected product: Linux. No package-level version data is available, so check the vendor advisory linked from the reference page.

Task:
1. Search the dependency manifests and lockfiles (for example package.json, package-lock.json, requirements.txt, poetry.lock, uv.lock, pom.xml, build.gradle, go.mod, Cargo.lock, Gemfile.lock) and any Dockerfiles for the affected packages, including transitive dependencies.
2. If an affected version is in use, upgrade it to the fixed version for its release line with the project's package manager, so the lockfile is regenerated. Prefer the smallest upgrade that fixes it.
3. If there is no fix, or the upgrade would break the build, do not guess: explain the risk and the safest workaround instead.
4. Run the tests and summarise what changed and why.
5. If nothing in the project is affected, say so and change nothing.

Reference: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-99184/ (Markdown: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-99184/index.md)
```

## Sources

- CVE record: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-99184
- NVD: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-99184
- OSV: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/CVE-2026-99184

---
From sbomify Insights: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-99184/
Summaries are generated and may contain mistakes; the official description above is the record.