CVE-2026-98825: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rtc: mpfs: fix unchecked devm_clk_get() error pointer in probe() devm_clk

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rtc: mpfs: fix unchecked devm_clk_get() error pointer in probe() devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev,

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rtc: mpfs: fix unchecked devm_clk_get() error pointer in probe() devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "rtcref")'s return value was passed straight into clk_get_rate() without checking it for an error first, unlike the "rtc" clock a few lines above which is correctly checked with IS_ERR(). clk_get_rate() only guards against a NULL clk, not an error pointer: if (!clk) return 0; ... rate = clk_core_get_rate_recalc(clk->core); so if devm_clk_get() ever returns an error pointer here (for example ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER), which is the normal, expected outcome if the clkcfg clock-provider this RTC depends on has not registered its clocks yet by the time this driver probes), clk_get_rate() dereferences that error pointer instead of returning 0, crashing instead of letting probe defer. Capture the clock in the existing 'clk' local and check it with IS_ERR() before calling clk_get_rate(), matching the handling already used for the "rtc" clock in this same function.

Description from the National Vulnerability Database, published by 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

What it means for a small business

Linux is on the computers, phones or browsers your team uses every day. Turn on automatic updates and restart: most of these fixes only take effect after a restart.

How likely is an attack? The Exploit Prediction Scoring System, run by FIRST (the global association of security response teams), puts the odds of this one being exploited in the next 30 days at 0.20%, higher than 9% of CVEs. That’s low, but low isn’t zero, and the odds jump the day someone publishes an exploit. Scored October 29, 2026, updated daily.

Check your own setup

Website check: reads what your site runs from the outside (WordPress version, plugins it can see, old server software) and matches it against this database.
Server check: what your web server says about itself, and whether that version has known flaws.

Sources

Part of the Huttenlocher Technologies vulnerability database, refreshed twice a day from CISA and the NVD. The title, category and plain-language guidance are ours; check the linked record before acting on a detail. This is general guidance, not a review of your systems.

Weekly security brief

The flaws that hit local websites, every Friday.

One short email: what got exploited this week, which WordPress plugins broke, and what to check. Unsubscribe in one click.