In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
btrfs: fix deadlock with fiemap and extent locking
While working on the patchset to remove extent locking I got a lockdep
splat with fiemap and pagefaulting with my new extent lock replacement
lock.
This deadlock exists with our normal code, we just don't have lockdep
annotations with the extent locking so we've never noticed it.
Since we're copying the fiemap extent to user space on every iteration
we have the chance of pagefaulting. Because we hold the extent lock for
the entire range we could mkwrite into a range in the file that we have
mmap'ed. This would deadlock with the following stack trace
[<0>] lock_extent+0x28d/0x2f0
[<0>] btrfs_page_mkwrite+0x273/0x8a0
[<0>] do_page_mkwrite+0x50/0xb0
[<0>] do_fault+0xc1/0x7b0
[<0>] __handle_mm_fault+0x2fa/0x460
[<0>] handle_mm_fault+0xa4/0x330
[<0>] do_user_addr_fault+0x1f4/0x800
[<0>] exc_page_fault+0x7c/0x1e0
[<0>] asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30
[<0>] rep_movs_alternative+0x33/0x70
[<0>] _copy_to_user+0x49/0x70
[<0>] fiemap_fill_next_extent+0xc8/0x120
[<0>] emit_fiemap_extent+0x4d/0xa0
[<0>] extent_fiemap+0x7f8/0xad0
[<0>] btrfs_fiemap+0x49/0x80
[<0>] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x3e1/0xb50
[<0>] do_syscall_64+0x94/0x1a0
[<0>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x6e/0x76
I wrote an fstest to reproduce this deadlock without my replacement lock
and verified that the deadlock exists with our existing locking.
To fix this simply don't take the extent lock for the entire duration of
the fiemap. This is safe in general because we keep track of where we
are when we're searching the tree, so if an ordered extent updates in
the middle of our fiemap call we'll still emit the correct extents
because we know what offset we were on before.
The only place we maintain the lock is searching delalloc. Since the
delalloc stuff can change during writeback we want to lock the extent
range so we have a consistent view of delalloc at the time we're
checking to see if we need to set the delalloc flag.
With this patch applied we no longer deadlock with my testcase.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-29). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it