Vulnerability record · CVE-2026-63875 · published 19 July 2026
CVE-2026-63875: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64: tlb: Flush walk cache when unshari…
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64: tlb: Flush walk cache when unsharing PMD tables When huge_pmd_unshare() is called to unshare a PMD table, the tlb_unshare_pmd_ptdesc() function sets tlb->unshared_tables=true but the aarch64 tlb_flush() only checked tlb->freed_tables to determine whether to use TLBF_NONE (vae1is, invalidates walk cache) or TLBF_NOWALKCACHE (vale1is, leaf-only). This caused the stale PMD page table entry to remain in the walk cache after unshare, potentially leading to incorrect page table walks. Fix by including unshared_tables in the check, so that when unsharing tables, TLBF_NONE is used and the walk cache is properly invalidated. Here is the detailed distinction between vae1is and vale1is: | Instruction Combination | Actual Invalidation Scope | | ------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------| | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`0` | All entries at all levels (full invalidation) | | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Non-leaf at Level 0/1 + leaf at Level 2 | | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`0` | Leaf entries at all levels (non-leaf not cleared) | | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Leaf entry at Level 2 only |
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: arm64: tlb: Flush walk cache when unsharing PMD tables When huge_pmd_unshare() is called to unshare a PMD table, the tlb_unshare_pmd_ptdesc() function sets tlb->unshared_tables=true but the aarch64 tlb_flush() only checked tlb->freed_tables to determine whether to use TLBF_NONE (vae1is, invalidates walk cache) or TLBF_NOWALKCACHE (vale1is, leaf-only). This caused the stale PMD page table entry to remain in the walk cache after unshare, potentially leading to incorrect page table walks. Fix by including unshared_tables in the check, so that when unsharing tables, TLBF_NONE is used and the walk cache is properly invalidated. Here is the detailed distinction between vae1is and vale1is: | Instruction Combination | Actual Invalidation Scope | | ------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------| | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`0` | All entries at all levels (full invalidation) | | `VAE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Non-leaf at Level 0/1 + leaf at Level 2 | | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`0` | Leaf entries at all levels (non-leaf not cleared) | | `VALE1IS` + TTL=`2` (L2) | Leaf entry at Level 2 only |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Track CVE-2026-63875 inside VULONE
Watch it alongside the ransomware crews, C2 infrastructure and forum chatter that reference it, query it through the API and pull it into your SIEM over TAXII.
Source: NIST National Vulnerability Database (record CVE-2026-63875), CISA KEV, FIRST EPSS (scores of 2026-09-28). This page is refreshed as NVD updates the record.