Vulnerability · Published Jul 30, 2024 · Assigned by Linux

CVE-2024-42103btrfs: fix adding block group to a reclaim list and the unused list during reclaim

High 7.8

In plain English

A high-severity security flaw in Linux from Linux. There are no confirmed reports of exploitation so far. The chance it is exploited in the next 30 days is estimated at 0.2% (higher than 16% of all known vulnerabilities). Fixed versions are available - upgrade the affected package.

Severity (CVSS 3.1)7.8High
Exploit odds (30 days)0.2%top 83.6% of all CVEs
Exploited in the wildNo reportsCISA SSVC: none
Attack toolingNoneno public tooling known

Official description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix adding block group to a reclaim list and the unused list during reclaim There is a potential parallel list adding for retrying in btrfs_reclaim_bgs_work and adding to the unused list. Since the block group is removed from the reclaim list and it is on a relocation work, it can be added into the unused list in parallel. When that happens, adding it to the reclaim list will corrupt the list head and trigger list corruption like below. Fix it by taking fs_info->unused_bgs_lock. [177.504][T2585409] BTRFS error (device nullb1): error relocating ch= unk 2415919104 [177.514][T2585409] list_del corruption. next->prev should be ff1100= 0344b119c0, but was ff11000377e87c70. (next=3Dff110002390cd9c0) [177.529][T2585409] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [177.537][T2585409] kernel BUG at lib/list_debug.c:65! [177.545][T2585409] Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN NOPTI [177.555][T2585409] CPU: 9 PID: 2585409 Comm: kworker/u128:2 Tainted: G W 6.10.0-rc5-kts #1 [177.568][T2585409] Hardware name: Supermicro SYS-520P-WTR/X12SPW-TF, BIOS 1.2 02/14/2022 [177.579][T2585409] Workqueue: events_unbound btrfs_reclaim_bgs_work[btrfs] [177.589][T2585409] RIP: 0010:__list_del_entry_valid_or_report.cold+0x70/0x72 [177.624][T2585409] RSP: 0018:ff11000377e87a70 EFLAGS: 00010286 [177.633][T2585409] RAX: 000000000000006d RBX: ff11000344b119c0 RCX:0000000000000000 [177.644][T2585409] RDX: 000000000000006d RSI: 0000000000000008 RDI:ffe21c006efd0f40 [177.655][T2585409] RBP: ff110002e0509f78 R08: 0000000000000001 R09:ffe21c006efd0f08 [177.665][T2585409] R10: ff11000377e87847 R11: 0000000000000000 R12:ff110002390cd9c0 [177.676][T2585409] R13: ff11000344b119c0 R14: ff110002e0508000 R15:dffffc0000000000 [177.687][T2585409] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ff11000fec880000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [177.700][T2585409] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [177.709][T2585409] CR2: 00007f06bc7b1978 CR3: 0000001021e86005 CR4:0000000000771ef0 [177.720][T2585409] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2:0000000000000000 [177.731][T2585409] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7:0000000000000400 [177.742][T2585409] PKRU: 55555554 [177.748][T2585409] Call Trace: [177.753][T2585409] <TASK> [177.759][T2585409] ? __die_body.cold+0x19/0x27 [177.766][T2585409] ? die+0x2e/0x50 [177.772][T2585409] ? do_trap+0x1ea/0x2d0 [177.779][T2585409] ? __list_del_entry_valid_or_report.cold+0x70/0x72 [177.788][T2585409] ? do_error_trap+0xa3/0x160 [177.795][T2585409] ? __list_del_entry_valid_or_report.cold+0x70/0x72 [177.805][T2585409] ? handle_invalid_op+0x2c/0x40 [177.812][T2585409] ? __list_del_entry_valid_or_report.cold+0x70/0x72 [177.820][T2585409] ? exc_invalid_op+0x2d/0x40 [177.827][T2585409] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20 [177.834][T2585409] ? __list_del_entry_valid_or_report.cold+0x70/0x72 [177.843][T2585409] btrfs_delete_unused_bgs+0x3d9/0x14c0 [btrfs] There is a similar retry_list code in btrfs_delete_unused_bgs(), but it is safe, AFAICS. Since the block group was in the unused list, the used bytes should be 0 when it was added to the unused list. Then, it checks block_group->{used,reserved,pinned} are still 0 under the block_group->lock. So, they should be still eligible for the unused list, not the reclaim list. The reason it is safe there it's because because we're holding space_info->groups_sem in write mode. That means no other task can allocate from the block group, so while we are at deleted_unused_bgs() it's not possible for other tasks to allocate and deallocate extents from the block group, so it can't be added to the unused list or the reclaim list by anyone else. The bug can be reproduced by btrfs/166 after a few rounds. In practice this can be hit when relocation cannot find more chunk space and ends with ENOSPC.

Affected packages & fixed versions

EcosystemPackageFixed inAdvisory
Debian:12linux6.1.98-1DEBIAN-CVE-2024-42103
Debian:13linux6.9.9-1DEBIAN-CVE-2024-42103
Debian:14linux6.9.9-1DEBIAN-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux6.8.0-48.48UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-allwinner-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-aws6.8.0-1018.20UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-aws-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-aws-6.2no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-aws-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-aws-6.86.8.0-1018.19~22.04.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-azure6.8.0-1017.20UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-azure-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-azure-6.2no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-azure-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-azure-6.86.8.0-1017.20~22.04.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-azure-fde-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-azure-fde-6.2no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-gcp6.8.0-1017.19UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-gcp-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-gcp-6.2no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-gcp-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-gcp-6.86.8.0-1017.19~22.04.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-gke6.8.0-1013.17UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-gkeop6.8.0-1002.4UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-hwe-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-hwe-6.2no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-hwe-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-hwe-6.86.8.0-48.48~22.04.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-ibm6.8.0-1015.15UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-intel-iot-realtimeno fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-lowlatency6.8.0-48.48.3UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-lowlatency-hwe-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-lowlatency-hwe-6.2no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-lowlatency-hwe-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-lowlatency-hwe-6.86.8.0-48.48.3~22.04.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-nvidia6.8.0-1017.19UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-nvidia-6.2no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-nvidia-6.86.8.0-1017.19~22.04.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-nvidia-lowlatency6.8.0-1017.19.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-oem-5.17no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-oem-6.0no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-oem-6.1no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-oem-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-oem-6.86.8.0-1016.16UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-oracle6.8.0-1015.16UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-oracle-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-oracle-6.86.8.0-1015.15~22.04.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-raspi6.8.0-1014.16UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-realtimeno fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-riscvno fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:24.04:LTSlinux-riscv6.8.0-48.48.1UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-riscv-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-riscv-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-riscv-6.86.8.0-48.48.1~22.04.2UBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-starfive-5.19no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-starfive-6.2no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103
Ubuntu:22.04:LTSlinux-starfive-6.5no fix listedUBUNTU-CVE-2024-42103

Affected products (as reported)

VendorProductVersions
Linux Linux 2311fd03027d2c1b2ac4a3a41153a16352659b65 – before 522b39bd7163e8dc49f8cf10b9b782218ac4874615cb476ceb7da730857b8e94f06161273adb7a3a – before aa1d8cc0cc500e06b316cd6732d4e6c1388fe33cbf1e8c21f2bef7dfcdadc93b0bb2e8723639d5f7 – before f8e960be923f74a273c62478c9cab9523936752bab58fe210c40e582a9fd3d122ae21071adb5470a – before 326fa14549d7969ef80d3f5beea5470cd1c8e67f4eb4e85c4f818491efc67e9373aa16b123c3f522 – before 48f091fd50b2eb33ae5eaea9ed3c4f81603acf38
Linux Linux 5.15.162 – before 5.15.1636.1.96 – before 6.1.986.6.36 – before 6.6.396.9.7 – before 6.9.9

References