### [CVE-2024-40917](https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2024-40917)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Product&message=Linux&color=blue)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Version&message=&color=brightgreen)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Version&message=6.8%20&color=brightgreen)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Version&message=6fdc770506eb8379bf68a49d4e193c8364ac64e0%20&color=brightgreen)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Version&message=ff6c3d81f2e86b63a3a530683f89ef393882782a%20&color=brightgreen)
![](https://img.shields.io/static/v1?label=Vulnerability&message=n%2Fa&color=blue)

### Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:memblock: make memblock_set_node() also warn about use of MAX_NUMNODESOn an (old) x86 system with SRAT just covering space above 4Gb:    ACPI: SRAT: Node 0 PXM 0 [mem 0x100000000-0xfffffffff] hotplugthe commit referenced below leads to this NUMA configuration no longerbeing refused by a CONFIG_NUMA=y kernel (previously    NUMA: nodes only cover 6144MB of your 8185MB e820 RAM. Not used.    No NUMA configuration found    Faking a node at [mem 0x0000000000000000-0x000000027fffffff]was seen in the log directly after the message quoted above), because ofmemblock_validate_numa_coverage() checking for NUMA_NO_NODE (only). Thisin turn led to memblock_alloc_range_nid()'s warning about MAX_NUMNODEStriggering, followed by a NULL deref in memmap_init() when trying toaccess node 64's (NODE_SHIFT=6) node data.To compensate said change, make memblock_set_node() warn on and adjusta passed in value of MAX_NUMNODES, just like various other functionsalready do.

### POC

#### Reference
No PoCs from references.

#### Github
- https://github.com/fkie-cad/nvd-json-data-feeds