CVE-2024-38306

MEDIUMNVD 4.74.7
EchelonGraph scoreMEDIUM confidence

Score 4.7 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2024-06-25. NVD baseline CVSS 4.7; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: epss, ghsa, nvd
4.7
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorLow exploitation likelihood right now — keep watching.
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS: 0%CVSS: 4.7Exploit: NoneExposed: 0

A fix is available — apply it.

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

btrfs: protect folio::private when attaching extent buffer folios

[BUG] Since v6.8 there are rare kernel crashes reported by various people, the common factor is bad page status error messages like this:

BUG: Bad page state in process kswapd0 pfn:d6e840 page: refcount:0 mapcount:0 mapping:000000007512f4f2 index:0x2796c2c7c pfn:0xd6e840 aops:btree_aops ino:1 flags: 0x17ffffe0000008(uptodate|node=0|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x3fffff) page_type: 0xffffffff() raw: 0017ffffe0000008 dead000000000100 dead000000000122 ffff88826d0be4c0 raw: 00000002796c2c7c 0000000000000000 00000000ffffffff 0000000000000000 page dumped because: non-NULL mapping

[CAUSE] Commit 09e6cef19c9f ("btrfs: refactor alloc_extent_buffer() to allocate-then-attach method") changes the sequence when allocating a new extent buffer.

Previously we always called grab_extent_buffer() under mapping->i_private_lock, to ensure the safety on modification on folio::private (which is a pointer to extent buffer for regular sectorsize).

This can lead to the following race:

Thread A is trying to allocate an extent buffer at bytenr X, with 4 4K pages, meanwhile thread B is trying to release the page at X + 4K (the second page of the extent buffer at X).

Thread A | Thread B -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- | btree_release_folio() | | This is for the page at X + 4K, | | Not page X. | | alloc_extent_buffer() | |- release_extent_buffer() |- filemap_add_folio() for the | | |- atomic_dec_and_test(eb->refs) | page at bytenr X (the first | | | | page). | | | | Which returned -EEXIST. | | | | | | | |- filemap_lock_folio() | | | | Returned the first page locked. | | | | | | | |- grab_extent_buffer() | | | | |- atomic_inc_not_zero() | | | | | Returned false | | | | |- folio_detach_private() | | |- folio_detach_private() for X | |- folio_test_private() | | |- folio_test_private() | Returned true | | | Returned true |- folio_put() | |- folio_put()

Now there are two puts on the same folio at folio X, leading to refcount underflow of the folio X, and eventually causing the BUG_ON() on the page->mapping.

The condition is not that easy to hit:

  • The release must be triggered for the middle page of an eb
If the release is on the same first page of an eb, page lock would kick in and prevent the race.
  • folio_detach_private() has a very small race window
It's only between folio_test_private() and folio_clear_private().

That's exactly when mapping->i_private_lock is used to prevent such race, and commit 09e6cef19c9f ("btrfs: refactor alloc_extent_buffer() to allocate-then-attach method") screwed that up.

At that time, I thought the page lock would kick in as filemap_release_folio() also requires the page to be locked, but forgot the filemap_release_folio() only locks one page, not all pages of an extent buffer.

[FIX] Move all the code requiring i_private_lock into attach_eb_folio_to_filemap(), so that everything is done with proper lock protection.

Furthermore to prevent future problems, add an extra lockdep_assert_locked() to ensure we're holding the proper lock.

To reproducer that is able to hit the race (takes a few minutes with instrumented code inserting delays to alloc_extent_buffer()):

#!/bin/sh drop_caches () { while(true); do echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches echo 1 > /proc/sys/vm/compact_memory done }

run_tar () { while(true); do for x in seq 1 80 ; do tar cf /dev/zero /mnt > /dev/null & done wait done }

mkfs.btrfs -f -d single -m single ---truncated---

CVSS v3
4.7
EG Score
4.7(medium)
EG Risk
21(Track)
EG Risk 21/100SSVC: Track

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score: it fuses intrinsic severity with real-world exploitation and automatability so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner. Distinct from the 0–10 EG Score (severity).

How it’s computed
Severity47% × 45%
Exploitation0% × 40%
Automatability0% × 15%
Action: Routine — remediate on your standard cadence.
EPSS
3.6%
KEV
Not listed

Published

June 25, 2024

Last Modified

September 17, 2025

Patch Availability(8)

Patches are aggregated from vendor advisories (Red Hat, Microsoft, Cisco, GitHub) and package ecosystems (OSV, GHSA). Multiple rows for the same upstream release have been deduplicated.

Weakness Classification(2)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

All Vendor Advisories

(7)

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 11× in last 7d / 47× in last 30d)

Each row is a source pipeline that fetched or updated this CVE on that date, with what changed. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. Most recent first.

  1. 2026-07-23 14:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-07-23 14:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-07-23 02:38 UTCEG score recompute
  4. 2026-07-22 14:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-07-22 14:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-07-21 15:23 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-07-21 15:23 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-07-20 17:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-07-19 14:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-07-19 14:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-07-18 10:03 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-07-16 17:02 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-07-15 16:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-07-15 16:56 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-07-15 01:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-07-15 01:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  17. 2026-07-14 03:40 UTCOSV refresh
  18. 2026-07-13 22:29 UTCEPSS rescore
  19. 2026-07-13 06:11 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-07-12 05:45 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-07-11 08:26 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-07-11 08:26 UTCEPSS rescore
  23. 2026-07-09 19:09 UTCEPSS rescore
  24. 2026-07-08 15:14 UTCEPSS rescore
  25. 2026-07-08 15:13 UTCEPSS rescore
Show 75 more
  1. 2026-07-07 13:45 UTCEPSS rescore
  2. 2026-07-06 16:26 UTCEPSS rescore
  3. 2026-07-06 02:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  4. 2026-07-06 02:22 UTCEPSS rescore
  5. 2026-07-05 02:29 UTCEPSS rescore
  6. 2026-07-04 06:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  7. 2026-07-01 15:05 UTCEPSS rescore
  8. 2026-06-30 23:21 UTCEPSS rescore
  9. 2026-06-30 23:21 UTCEPSS rescore
  10. 2026-06-29 14:05 UTCEPSS rescore
  11. 2026-06-28 14:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  12. 2026-06-28 14:06 UTCEPSS rescore
  13. 2026-06-28 04:55 UTCEPSS rescore
  14. 2026-06-28 04:55 UTCEPSS rescore
  15. 2026-06-27 03:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  16. 2026-06-27 03:07 UTCEPSS rescore
  17. 2026-06-26 01:16 UTCOSV refresh
  18. 2026-06-25 13:49 UTCEPSS rescore
  19. 2026-06-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  20. 2026-06-24 14:04 UTCEPSS rescore
  21. 2026-06-23 21:32 UTCEPSS rescore
  22. 2026-06-23 21:32 UTCEPSS rescore
  23. 2026-06-22 14:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  24. 2026-06-22 14:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  25. 2026-06-21 14:55 UTCEPSS rescore
  26. 2026-06-21 14:55 UTCEPSS rescore
  27. 2026-06-21 01:58 UTCEPSS rescore
  28. 2026-06-21 01:58 UTCEPSS rescore
  29. 2026-06-19 19:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  30. 2026-06-19 19:25 UTCEPSS rescore
  31. 2026-06-17 17:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  32. 2026-06-16 17:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  33. 2026-06-16 17:52 UTCEPSS rescore
  34. 2026-06-15 17:47 UTCEPSS rescore
  35. 2026-06-14 23:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  36. 2026-06-13 22:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  37. 2026-06-13 22:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  38. 2026-06-12 23:11 UTCEPSS rescore
  39. 2026-06-11 13:59 UTCEPSS rescore
  40. 2026-06-10 22:17 UTCEPSS rescore
  41. 2026-06-10 13:21 UTCEPSS rescore
  42. 2026-06-08 14:16 UTCEPSS rescore
  43. 2026-06-08 14:13 UTCOSV refresh
  44. 2026-06-07 15:24 UTCEPSS rescore
  45. 2026-06-07 15:24 UTCEPSS rescore
  46. 2026-06-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  47. 2026-06-06 13:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  48. 2026-06-05 22:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  49. 2026-06-05 22:46 UTCEPSS rescore
  50. 2026-06-05 06:09 UTCEPSS rescore
  51. 2026-06-05 06:09 UTCEPSS rescore
  52. 2026-06-04 13:11 UTCEPSS rescore
  53. 2026-06-04 13:11 UTCEPSS rescore
  54. 2026-06-02 20:12 UTCEPSS rescore
  55. 2026-06-01 13:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  56. 2026-06-01 13:51 UTCEPSS rescore
  57. 2026-05-31 22:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  58. 2026-05-31 22:30 UTCEPSS rescore
  59. 2026-05-31 00:15 UTCEPSS rescore
  60. 2026-05-31 00:15 UTCEPSS rescore
  61. 2026-05-29 13:43 UTCEPSS rescore
  62. 2026-05-28 13:44 UTCEPSS rescore
  63. 2026-05-28 13:44 UTCEPSS rescore
  64. 2026-05-28 13:44 UTCEPSS rescore
  65. 2026-05-27 13:40 UTCEPSS rescore
  66. 2026-05-27 13:40 UTCEPSS rescore
  67. 2026-05-27 13:40 UTCEPSS rescore
  68. 2026-05-26 13:43 UTCEPSS rescore
  69. 2026-05-26 13:43 UTCEPSS rescore
  70. 2026-05-26 07:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  71. 2026-05-26 07:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  72. 2026-05-26 07:18 UTCEPSS rescore
  73. 2026-05-23 23:21 UTCEG score recompute
  74. 2026-05-23 23:21 UTCVendor advisory
  75. 2026-05-23 23:21 UTCGHSA enrichment

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2024-38306?
CVE-2024-38306 is a medium vulnerability published on June 25, 2024. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: protect folio::private when attaching extent buffer folios [BUG] Since v6.8 there are rare kernel crashes reported by various people, the common factor is bad page status error messages like this: BUG: Bad page state in…
When was CVE-2024-38306 disclosed?
CVE-2024-38306 was first published in the National Vulnerability Database on June 25, 2024, with the most recent update on September 17, 2025. EchelonGraph re-ingests CVE updates from NVD on a 2-hour cycle, so this page reflects the latest published state.
Is CVE-2024-38306 actively exploited?
CVE-2024-38306 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 3.6% percentile likelihood of exploitation in the next 30 days — higher percentiles indicate greater predicted risk.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2024-38306?
CVE-2024-38306 has a CVSS v3 base score of 4.7 (NVD).
How do I remediate CVE-2024-38306?
Patch to the fixed version published by the affected vendor. Where vendor advisories exist for CVE-2024-38306, EchelonGraph cross-links them in the Vendor Advisories panel below — those typically contain the canonical remediation steps, fixed version numbers, and any vendor-specific mitigations.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2024-38306

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2024-38306?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.