CVE-2025-22115

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

btrfs: fix block group refcount race in btrfs_create_pending_block_groups()

Block group creation is done in two phases, which results in a slightly unintuitive property: a block group can be allocated/deallocated from after btrfs_make_block_group() adds it to the space_info with btrfs_add_bg_to_space_info(), but before creation is completely completed in btrfs_create_pending_block_groups(). As a result, it is possible for a block group to go unused and have btrfs_mark_bg_unused called on it concurrently with btrfs_create_pending_block_groups. This causes a number of issues, which were fixed with the block group flag BLOCK_GROUP_FLAG_NEW.

However, this fix is not quite complete. Since it does not use the unused_bg_lock, it is possible for the following race to occur:

btrfs_create_pending_block_groups btrfs_mark_bg_unused if list_empty // false list_del_init clear_bit else if (test_bit) // true list_move_tail

And we get into the exact same broken ref count and invalid new_bgs state for transaction cleanup that BLOCK_GROUP_FLAG_NEW was designed to prevent.

The broken refcount aspect will result in a warning like:

[1272.943527] refcount_t: underflow; use-after-free. [1272.943967] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 61 at lib/refcount.c:28 refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.944731] Modules linked in: btrfs virtio_net xor zstd_compress raid6_pq null_blk [last unloaded: btrfs] [1272.945550] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 61 Comm: kworker/u32:1 Kdump: loaded Tainted: G W 6.14.0-rc5+ #108 [1272.946368] Tainted: [W]=WARN [1272.946585] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Arch Linux 1.16.3-1-1 04/01/2014 [1272.947273] Workqueue: btrfs_discard btrfs_discard_workfn [btrfs] [1272.947788] RIP: 0010:refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.949532] RSP: 0018:ffffbf1200247df0 EFLAGS: 00010282 [1272.949901] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffa14b00e3f800 RCX: 0000000000000000 [1272.950437] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffbf1200247c78 RDI: 00000000ffffdfff [1272.950986] RBP: ffffa14b00dc2860 R08: 00000000ffffdfff R09: ffffffff90526268 [1272.951512] R10: ffffffff904762c0 R11: 0000000063666572 R12: ffffa14b00dc28c0 [1272.952024] R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffffa14b00dc2868 R15: 000001285dcd12c0 [1272.952850] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffffa14d33c40000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [1272.953458] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [1272.953931] CR2: 00007f838cbda000 CR3: 000000010104e000 CR4: 00000000000006f0 [1272.954474] Call Trace: [1272.954655] [1272.954812] ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.955173] ? __warn.cold+0x93/0xd7 [1272.955487] ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.955816] ? report_bug+0xe7/0x120 [1272.956103] ? handle_bug+0x53/0x90 [1272.956424] ? exc_invalid_op+0x13/0x60 [1272.956700] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x16/0x20 [1272.957011] ? refcount_warn_saturate+0xba/0x110 [1272.957399] btrfs_discard_cancel_work.cold+0x26/0x2b [btrfs] [1272.957853] btrfs_put_block_group.cold+0x5d/0x8e [btrfs] [1272.958289] btrfs_discard_workfn+0x194/0x380 [btrfs] [1272.958729] process_one_work+0x130/0x290 [1272.959026] worker_thread+0x2ea/0x420 [1272.959335] ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 [1272.959644] kthread+0xd7/0x1c0 [1272.959872] ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 [1272.960172] ret_from_fork+0x30/0x50 [1272.960474] ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 [1272.960745] ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 [1272.961035] [1272.961238] —[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]—

Though we have seen them in the async discard workfn as well. It is most likely to happen after a relocation finishes which cancels discard, tears down the block group, etc.

Fix this fully by taking the lock arou —truncated—

Weakness

The product contains a concurrent code sequence that requires temporary, exclusive access to a shared resource, but a timing window exists in which the shared resource can be modified by another code sequence operating concurrently.

Affected Software

Extended Description

A race condition occurs within concurrent environments, and it is effectively a property of a code sequence. Depending on the context, a code sequence may be in the form of a function call, a small number of instructions, a series of program invocations, etc. A race condition violates these properties, which are closely related:

A race condition exists when an “interfering code sequence” can still access the shared resource, violating exclusivity. The interfering code sequence could be “trusted” or “untrusted.” A trusted interfering code sequence occurs within the product; it cannot be modified by the attacker, and it can only be invoked indirectly. An untrusted interfering code sequence can be authored directly by the attacker, and typically it is external to the vulnerable product.

Potential Mitigations

• Minimize the usage of shared resources in order to remove as much complexity as possible from the control flow and to reduce the likelihood of unexpected conditions occurring.
• Additionally, this will minimize the amount of synchronization necessary and may even help to reduce the likelihood of a denial of service where an attacker may be able to repeatedly trigger a critical section (CWE-400).

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/26.html
• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/29.html

References

• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2d8e5168d48a91e7a802d3003e72afb4304bebfa
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/9d383a6fc59271aaaf07a33b23b2eac5b9268b7a
• https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/ee56da95f8962b86fec4ef93f866e64c8d025a58