<?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, 28 Sep 2026 13:55:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2025-68356 — gfs2: Prevent recursive memory reclaim</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-68356</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;gfs2: Prevent recursive memory reclaim&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Function new_inode() returns a new inode with inode-&amp;gt;i_mapping-&amp;gt;gfp_mask
set to GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE.  This value includes the __GFP_FS flag, so
allocations in that address space can recurse into filesystem memory
reclaim.  We don&amp;#39;t want that to happen because it can consume a
significant amount of stack memory.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Worse than that is that it can also deadlock: for example, in several
places, gfs2_unstuff_dinode() is called inside filesystem transactions.
This calls filemap_grab_folio(), which can allocate a new folio, which
can trigger memory reclaim.  If memory reclaim recurses into the
filesystem and starts another transaction, a deadlock will ensue.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To fix these kinds of problems, prevent memory reclaim from recursing
into filesystem code by making sure that the gfp_mask of inode address
spaces doesn&amp;#39;t include __GFP_FS.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &amp;#34;meta&amp;#34; and resource group address spaces were already using GFP_NOFS
as their gfp_mask (which doesn&amp;#39;t include __GFP_FS).  The default value
of GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE is less restrictive than GFP_NOFS, though.  To
avoid being overly limiting, use the default value and only knock off
the __GFP_FS flag.  I&amp;#39;m not sure if this will actually make a
difference, but it also shouldn&amp;#39;t hurt.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This patch is loosely based on commit ad22c7a043c2 (&amp;#34;xfs: prevent stack
overflows from page cache allocation&amp;#34;).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fixes xfstest generic/273.&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;gfs2: Prevent recursive memory reclaim&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Function new_inode() returns a new inode with inode-&amp;gt;i_mapping-&amp;gt;gfp_mask
set to GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE.  This value includes the __GFP_FS flag, so
allocations in that address space can recurse into filesystem memory
reclaim.  We don&amp;#39;t want that to happen because it can consume a
significant amount of stack memory.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Worse than that is that it can also deadlock: for example, in several
places, gfs2_unstuff_dinode() is called inside filesystem transactions.
This calls filemap_grab_folio(), which can allocate a new folio, which
can trigger memory reclaim.  If memory reclaim recurses into the
filesystem and starts another transaction, a deadlock will ensue.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To fix these kinds of problems, prevent memory reclaim from recursing
into filesystem code by making sure that the gfp_mask of inode address
spaces doesn&amp;#39;t include __GFP_FS.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &amp;#34;meta&amp;#34; and resource group address spaces were already using GFP_NOFS
as their gfp_mask (which doesn&amp;#39;t include __GFP_FS).  The default value
of GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE is less restrictive than GFP_NOFS, though.  To
avoid being overly limiting, use the default value and only knock off
the __GFP_FS flag.  I&amp;#39;m not sure if this will actually make a
difference, but it also shouldn&amp;#39;t hurt.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This patch is loosely based on commit ad22c7a043c2 (&amp;#34;xfs: prevent stack
overflows from page cache allocation&amp;#34;).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fixes xfstest generic/273.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-68356</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
