In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
btrfs: fix subvolume deletion lockup caused by inodes xarray race
There is a race condition between inode eviction and inode caching that
can cause a live struct btrfs_inode to be missing from the root->inodes
xarray. Specifically, there is a window during evict() between the inode
being unhashed and deleted from the xarray. If btrfs_iget() is called
for the same inode in that window, it will be recreated and inserted
into the xarray, but then eviction will delete the new entry, leaving
nothing in the xarray:
Thread 1 Thread 2
---------------------------------------------------------------
evict()
remove_inode_hash()
btrfs_iget_path()
btrfs_iget_locked()
btrfs_read_locked_inode()
btrfs_add_inode_to_root()
destroy_inode()
btrfs_destroy_inode()
btrfs_del_inode_from_root()
__xa_erase
In turn, this can cause issues for subvolume deletion. Specifically, if
an inode is in this lost state, and all other inodes are evicted, then
btrfs_del_inode_from_root() will call btrfs_add_dead_root() prematurely.
If the lost inode has a delayed_node attached to it, then when
btrfs_clean_one_deleted_snapshot() calls btrfs_kill_all_delayed_nodes(),
it will loop forever because the delayed_nodes xarray will never become
empty (unless memory pressure forces the inode out). We saw this
manifest as soft lockups in production.
Fix it by only deleting the xarray entry if it matches the given inode
(using __xa_cmpxchg()).
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (4.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 4.7 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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