Total
305959 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-21942 | 2025-07-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: zoned: fix extent range end unlock in cow_file_range() Running generic/751 on the for-next branch often results in a hang like below. They are both stack by locking an extent. This suggests someone forget to unlock an extent. INFO: task kworker/u128:1:12 blocked for more than 323 seconds. Not tainted 6.13.0-BTRFS-ZNS+ #503 "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. task:kworker/u128:1 state:D stack:0 pid:12 tgid:12 ppid:2 flags:0x00004000 Workqueue: btrfs-fixup btrfs_work_helper [btrfs] Call Trace: <TASK> __schedule+0x534/0xdd0 schedule+0x39/0x140 __lock_extent+0x31b/0x380 [btrfs] ? __pfx_autoremove_wake_function+0x10/0x10 btrfs_writepage_fixup_worker+0xf1/0x3a0 [btrfs] btrfs_work_helper+0xff/0x480 [btrfs] ? lock_release+0x178/0x2c0 process_one_work+0x1ee/0x570 ? srso_return_thunk+0x5/0x5f worker_thread+0x1d1/0x3b0 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0x10b/0x230 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x30/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> INFO: task kworker/u134:0:184 blocked for more than 323 seconds. Not tainted 6.13.0-BTRFS-ZNS+ #503 "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. task:kworker/u134:0 state:D stack:0 pid:184 tgid:184 ppid:2 flags:0x00004000 Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-btrfs-4) Call Trace: <TASK> __schedule+0x534/0xdd0 schedule+0x39/0x140 __lock_extent+0x31b/0x380 [btrfs] ? __pfx_autoremove_wake_function+0x10/0x10 find_lock_delalloc_range+0xdb/0x260 [btrfs] writepage_delalloc+0x12f/0x500 [btrfs] ? srso_return_thunk+0x5/0x5f extent_write_cache_pages+0x232/0x840 [btrfs] btrfs_writepages+0x72/0x130 [btrfs] do_writepages+0xe7/0x260 ? srso_return_thunk+0x5/0x5f ? lock_acquire+0xd2/0x300 ? srso_return_thunk+0x5/0x5f ? find_held_lock+0x2b/0x80 ? wbc_attach_and_unlock_inode.part.0+0x102/0x250 ? wbc_attach_and_unlock_inode.part.0+0x102/0x250 __writeback_single_inode+0x5c/0x4b0 writeback_sb_inodes+0x22d/0x550 __writeback_inodes_wb+0x4c/0xe0 wb_writeback+0x2f6/0x3f0 wb_workfn+0x32a/0x510 process_one_work+0x1ee/0x570 ? srso_return_thunk+0x5/0x5f worker_thread+0x1d1/0x3b0 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0x10b/0x230 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x30/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> This happens because we have another success path for the zoned mode. When there is no active zone available, btrfs_reserve_extent() returns -EAGAIN. In this case, we have two reactions. (1) If the given range is never allocated, we can only wait for someone to finish a zone, so wait on BTRFS_FS_NEED_ZONE_FINISH bit and retry afterward. (2) Or, if some allocations are already done, we must bail out and let the caller to send IOs for the allocation. This is because these IOs may be necessary to finish a zone. The commit 06f364284794 ("btrfs: do proper folio cleanup when cow_file_range() failed") moved the unlock code from the inside of the loop to the outside. So, previously, the allocated extents are unlocked just after the allocation and so before returning from the function. However, they are no longer unlocked on the case (2) above. That caused the hang issue. Fix the issue by modifying the 'end' to the end of the allocated range. Then, we can exit the loop and the same unlock code can properly handle the case. | |||||
| CVE-2025-21879 | 1 Linux | 1 Linux Kernel | 2025-07-06 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix use-after-free on inode when scanning root during em shrinking At btrfs_scan_root() we are accessing the inode's root (and fs_info) in a call to btrfs_fs_closing() after we have scheduled the inode for a delayed iput, and that can result in a use-after-free on the inode in case the cleaner kthread does the iput before we dereference the inode in the call to btrfs_fs_closing(). Fix this by using the fs_info stored already in a local variable instead of doing inode->root->fs_info. | |||||
| CVE-2024-58091 | 2025-07-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/fbdev-dma: Add shadow buffering for deferred I/O DMA areas are not necessarily backed by struct page, so we cannot rely on it for deferred I/O. Allocate a shadow buffer for drivers that require deferred I/O and use it as framebuffer memory. Fixes driver errors about being "Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address" or "Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address". The patch splits drm_fbdev_dma_driver_fbdev_probe() in an initial allocation, which creates the DMA-backed buffer object, and a tail that sets up the fbdev data structures. There is a tail function for direct memory mappings and a tail function for deferred I/O with the shadow buffer. It is no longer possible to use deferred I/O without shadow buffer. It can be re-added if there exists a reliably test for usable struct page in the allocated DMA-backed buffer object. | |||||
| CVE-2024-57976 | 2025-07-06 | N/A | N/A | ||
| 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--- | |||||
| CVE-2024-36913 | 1 Linux | 1 Linux Kernel | 2025-07-06 | N/A | 8.1 HIGH |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: Drivers: hv: vmbus: Leak pages if set_memory_encrypted() fails In CoCo VMs it is possible for the untrusted host to cause set_memory_encrypted() or set_memory_decrypted() to fail such that an error is returned and the resulting memory is shared. Callers need to take care to handle these errors to avoid returning decrypted (shared) memory to the page allocator, which could lead to functional or security issues. VMBus code could free decrypted pages if set_memory_encrypted()/decrypted() fails. Leak the pages if this happens. | |||||
| CVE-2025-6022 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-5316 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-5104 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-4950 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-4694 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-3896 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-3524 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-3283 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-3156 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-3094 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-2904 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-2856 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-2718 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-2504 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||
| CVE-2025-2422 | 2025-07-05 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Rejected reason: This CVE ID has been rejected or withdrawn by its CVE Numbering Authority. | |||||