In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
btrfs: do proper folio cleanup when cow_file_range() failed
[BUG]
When testing with COW fixup marked as BUG_ON() (this is involved with the
new pin_user_pages*() change, which should not result new out-of-band
dirty pages), I hit a crash triggered by the BUG_ON() from hitting COW
fixup path.
This BUG_ON() happens just after a failed btrfs_run_delalloc_range():
BTRFS error (device dm-2): failed to run delalloc range, root 348 ino 405 folio 65536 submit_bitmap 6-15 start 90112 len 106496: -28
------------[ cut here ]------------
kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/extent_io.c:1444!
Internal error: Oops - BUG: 00000000f2000800 [#1] SMP
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 434621 Comm: kworker/u24:8 Tainted: G OE 6.12.0-rc7-custom+ #86
Hardware name: QEMU KVM Virtual Machine, BIOS unknown 2/2/2022
Workqueue: events_unbound btrfs_async_reclaim_data_space [btrfs]
pc : extent_writepage_io+0x2d4/0x308 [btrfs]
lr : extent_writepage_io+0x2d4/0x308 [btrfs]
Call trace:
extent_writepage_io+0x2d4/0x308 [btrfs]
extent_writepage+0x218/0x330 [btrfs]
extent_write_cache_pages+0x1d4/0x4b0 [btrfs]
btrfs_writepages+0x94/0x150 [btrfs]
do_writepages+0x74/0x190
filemap_fdatawrite_wbc+0x88/0xc8
start_delalloc_inodes+0x180/0x3b0 [btrfs]
btrfs_start_delalloc_roots+0x174/0x280 [btrfs]
shrink_delalloc+0x114/0x280 [btrfs]
flush_space+0x250/0x2f8 [btrfs]
btrfs_async_reclaim_data_space+0x180/0x228 [btrfs]
process_one_work+0x164/0x408
worker_thread+0x25c/0x388
kthread+0x100/0x118
ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
Code: aa1403e1 9402f3ef aa1403e0 9402f36f (d4210000)
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
[CAUSE]
That failure is mostly from cow_file_range(), where we can hit -ENOSPC.
Although the -ENOSPC is already a bug related to our space reservation
code, let's just focus on the error handling.
For example, we have the following dirty range [0, 64K) of an inode,
with 4K sector size and 4K page size:
0 16K 32K 48K 64K
|///////////////////////////////////////|
|#######################################|
Where |///| means page are still dirty, and |###| means the extent io
tree has EXTENT_DELALLOC flag.
- Enter extent_writepage() for page 0
- Enter btrfs_run_delalloc_range() for range [0, 64K)
- Enter cow_file_range() for range [0, 64K)
- Function btrfs_reserve_extent() only reserved one 16K extent
So we created extent map and ordered extent for range [0, 16K)
0 16K 32K 48K 64K
|////////|//////////////////////////////|
|<- OE ->|##############################|
And range [0, 16K) has its delalloc flag cleared.
But since we haven't yet submit any bio, involved 4 pages are still
dirty.
- Function btrfs_reserve_extent() returns with -ENOSPC
Now we have to run error cleanup, which will clear all
EXTENT_DELALLOC* flags and clear the dirty flags for the remaining
ranges:
0 16K 32K 48K 64K
|////////| |
| | |
Note that range [0, 16K) still has its pages dirty.
- Some time later, writeback is triggered again for the range [0, 16K)
since the page range still has dirty flags.
- btrfs_run_delalloc_range() will do nothing because there is no
EXTENT_DELALLOC flag.
- extent_writepage_io() finds page 0 has no ordered flag
Which falls into the COW fixup path, triggering the BUG_ON().
Unfortunately this error handling bug dates back to the introduction of
btrfs. Thankfully with the abuse of COW fixup, at least it won't crash
the kernel.
[FIX]
Instead of immediately unlocking the extent and folios, we keep the extent
and folios locked until either erroring out or the whole delalloc range
finished.
When the whole delalloc range finished without error, we just unlock the
whole range with PAGE_SET_ORDERED (and PAGE_UNLOCK for !keep_locked
cases)
---truncated---
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
- 0.3% 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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)14 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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