<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 10:19:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2024-42256 — cifs: Fix server re-repick on subrequest retry</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-42256</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;cifs: Fix server re-repick on subrequest retry&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When a subrequest is marked for needing retry, netfs will call
cifs_prepare_write() which will make cifs repick the server for the op
before renegotiating credits; it then calls cifs_issue_write() which
invokes smb2_async_writev() - which re-repicks the server.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If a different server is then selected, this causes the increment of
server-&amp;gt;in_flight to happen against one record and the decrement to happen
against another, leading to misaccounting.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by just removing the repick code in smb2_async_writev().  As this
is only called from netfslib-driven code, cifs_prepare_write() should
always have been called first, and so server should never be NULL and the
preparatory step is repeated in the event that we do a retry.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The problem manifests as a warning looking something like:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 72896 at fs/smb/client/smb2ops.c:97 smb2_add_credits+0x3f0/0x9e0 [cifs]
 ...
 RIP: 0010:smb2_add_credits+0x3f0/0x9e0 [cifs]
 ...
  smb2_writev_callback+0x334/0x560 [cifs]
  cifs_demultiplex_thread+0x77a/0x11b0 [cifs]
  kthread+0x187/0x1d0
  ret_from_fork+0x34/0x60
  ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Which may be triggered by a number of different xfstests running against an
Azure server in multichannel mode.  generic/249 seems the most repeatable,
but generic/215, generic/249 and generic/308 may also show it.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;cifs: Fix server re-repick on subrequest retry&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When a subrequest is marked for needing retry, netfs will call
cifs_prepare_write() which will make cifs repick the server for the op
before renegotiating credits; it then calls cifs_issue_write() which
invokes smb2_async_writev() - which re-repicks the server.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;If a different server is then selected, this causes the increment of
server-&amp;gt;in_flight to happen against one record and the decrement to happen
against another, leading to misaccounting.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix this by just removing the repick code in smb2_async_writev().  As this
is only called from netfslib-driven code, cifs_prepare_write() should
always have been called first, and so server should never be NULL and the
preparatory step is repeated in the event that we do a retry.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The problem manifests as a warning looking something like:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 72896 at fs/smb/client/smb2ops.c:97 smb2_add_credits+0x3f0/0x9e0 [cifs]
 ...
 RIP: 0010:smb2_add_credits+0x3f0/0x9e0 [cifs]
 ...
  smb2_writev_callback+0x334/0x560 [cifs]
  cifs_demultiplex_thread+0x77a/0x11b0 [cifs]
  kthread+0x187/0x1d0
  ret_from_fork+0x34/0x60
  ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Which may be triggered by a number of different xfstests running against an
Azure server in multichannel mode.  generic/249 seems the most repeatable,
but generic/215, generic/249 and generic/308 may also show it.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-42256</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
