CVE-2022-49547

Published Feb 26, 2025

Last updated 8 months ago

Overview

Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix deadlock between concurrent dio writes when low on free data space When reserving data space for a direct IO write we can end up deadlocking if we have multiple tasks attempting a write to the same file range, there are multiple extents covered by that file range, we are low on available space for data and the writes don't expand the inode's i_size. The deadlock can happen like this: 1) We have a file with an i_size of 1M, at offset 0 it has an extent with a size of 128K and at offset 128K it has another extent also with a size of 128K; 2) Task A does a direct IO write against file range [0, 256K), and because the write is within the i_size boundary, it takes the inode's lock (VFS level) in shared mode; 3) Task A locks the file range [0, 256K) at btrfs_dio_iomap_begin(), and then gets the extent map for the extent covering the range [0, 128K). At btrfs_get_blocks_direct_write(), it creates an ordered extent for that file range ([0, 128K)); 4) Before returning from btrfs_dio_iomap_begin(), it unlocks the file range [0, 256K); 5) Task A executes btrfs_dio_iomap_begin() again, this time for the file range [128K, 256K), and locks the file range [128K, 256K); 6) Task B starts a direct IO write against file range [0, 256K) as well. It also locks the inode in shared mode, as it's within the i_size limit, and then tries to lock file range [0, 256K). It is able to lock the subrange [0, 128K) but then blocks waiting for the range [128K, 256K), as it is currently locked by task A; 7) Task A enters btrfs_get_blocks_direct_write() and tries to reserve data space. Because we are low on available free space, it triggers the async data reclaim task, and waits for it to reserve data space; 8) The async reclaim task decides to wait for all existing ordered extents to complete (through btrfs_wait_ordered_roots()). It finds the ordered extent previously created by task A for the file range [0, 128K) and waits for it to complete; 9) The ordered extent for the file range [0, 128K) can not complete because it blocks at btrfs_finish_ordered_io() when trying to lock the file range [0, 128K). This results in a deadlock, because: - task B is holding the file range [0, 128K) locked, waiting for the range [128K, 256K) to be unlocked by task A; - task A is holding the file range [128K, 256K) locked and it's waiting for the async data reclaim task to satisfy its space reservation request; - the async data reclaim task is waiting for ordered extent [0, 128K) to complete, but the ordered extent can not complete because the file range [0, 128K) is currently locked by task B, which is waiting on task A to unlock file range [128K, 256K) and task A waiting on the async data reclaim task. This results in a deadlock between 4 task: task A, task B, the async data reclaim task and the task doing ordered extent completion (a work queue task). This type of deadlock can sporadically be triggered by the test case generic/300 from fstests, and results in a stack trace like the following: [12084.033689] INFO: task kworker/u16:7:123749 blocked for more than 241 seconds. [12084.034877] Not tainted 5.18.0-rc2-btrfs-next-115 #1 [12084.035562] "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. [12084.036548] task:kworker/u16:7 state:D stack: 0 pid:123749 ppid: 2 flags:0x00004000 [12084.036554] Workqueue: btrfs-flush_delalloc btrfs_work_helper [btrfs] [12084.036599] Call Trace: [12084.036601] <TASK> [12084.036606] __schedule+0x3cb/0xed0 [12084.036616] schedule+0x4e/0xb0 [12084.036620] btrfs_start_ordered_extent+0x109/0x1c0 [btrfs] [12084.036651] ? prepare_to_wait_exclusive+0xc0/0xc0 [12084.036659] btrfs_run_ordered_extent_work+0x1a/0x30 [btrfs] [12084.036688] btrfs_work_helper+0xf8/0x400 [btrfs] [12084.0367 ---truncated---
Source
416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
NVD status
Modified
Products
linux_kernel

Risk scores

CVSS 3.1

Type
Primary
Base score
5.5
Impact score
3.6
Exploitability score
1.8
Vector string
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Severity
MEDIUM

Weaknesses

nvd@nist.gov
CWE-667
134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0
CWE-667

Social media

Hype score
Not currently trending

Configurations

  1. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: coresight: tmc-etr: Fix race condition between sysfs and perf mode When trying to run perf and sysfs mode simultaneously, the WARN_ON() in tmc_etr_enable_hw() is triggered sometimes: WARNING: CPU: 42 PID: 3911571 at drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-tmc-etr.c:1060 tmc_etr_enable_hw+0xc0/0xd8 [coresight_tmc] [..snip..] Call trace: tmc_etr_enable_hw+0xc0/0xd8 [coresight_tmc] (P) tmc_enable_etr_sink+0x11c/0x250 [coresight_tmc] (L) tmc_enable_etr_sink+0x11c/0x250 [coresight_tmc] coresight_enable_path+0x1c8/0x218 [coresight] coresight_enable_sysfs+0xa4/0x228 [coresight] enable_source_store+0x58/0xa8 [coresight] dev_attr_store+0x20/0x40 sysfs_kf_write+0x4c/0x68 kernfs_fop_write_iter+0x120/0x1b8 vfs_write+0x2c8/0x388 ksys_write+0x74/0x108 __arm64_sys_write+0x24/0x38 el0_svc_common.constprop.0+0x64/0x148 do_el0_svc+0x24/0x38 el0_svc+0x3c/0x130 el0t_64_sync_handler+0xc8/0xd0 el0t_64_sync+0x1ac/0x1b0 ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Since the enablement of sysfs mode is separeted into two critical regions, one for sysfs buffer allocation and another for hardware enablement, it's possible to race with the perf mode. Fix this by double check whether the perf mode's been used before enabling the hardware in sysfs mode. mode: [sysfs mode] [perf mode] tmc_etr_get_sysfs_buffer() spin_lock(&drvdata->spinlock) [sysfs buffer allocation] spin_unlock(&drvdata->spinlock) spin_lock(&drvdata->spinlock) tmc_etr_enable_hw() drvdata->etr_buf = etr_perf->etr_buf spin_unlock(&drvdata->spinlock) spin_lock(&drvdata->spinlock) tmc_etr_enable_hw() WARN_ON(drvdata->etr_buf) // WARN sicne etr_buf initialized at the perf side spin_unlock(&drvdata->spinlock) With this fix, we retain the check for CS_MODE_PERF in get_etr_sysfs_buf. This ensures we verify whether the perf mode's already running before we actually allocate the buffer. Then we can save the time of allocating/freeing the sysfs buffer if race with the perf mode.CVE-2026-46272