FKIE_CVE-2026-74591
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-08-22 16:16 - Updated: 2026-08-25 06:18
Severity
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mm/filemap: __filemap_add_folio() restore index before retrying
In __filemap_add_folio()'s split-a-conflict loop, xas_set_order() is
applied repeatedly: each application modifies xas.xa_index, rounding it
down according to the split_order attempted at that stage: and if all goes
as intended, it eventually (or immediately) converges on an
xas_try_split() to the required folio_order, with xas.xa_index now the
same as index: then xas_store() puts the new folio into the xarray there.
But if a new node was needed, and GFP_NOWAIT allocation did not get one,
the lock is dropped, xas_nomem() used to allocate, and sequence retried.
If (that part of) the xarray is unchanged when the lock is reacquired, no
problem. But what if the conflict was meanwhile resolved by another
thread (perhaps even doing the same thing, inserting a folio at that same
index)? Isn't there a danger of now putting our folio into the xarray at
an intermediate rounded-down index? With !folio_contains() bug to follow,
when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM=y is checking for that.
Fix this with an xas_set_order() to restore the original xas.xa_index at
the bottom of the loop, so the retry does a full re-evaluation after
reacquiring the lock, and cannot reach xas_store() with the wrong index.
Production was suffering from rare SIGILLs and SIGSEGVs, executable text
found a page away from where it belonged, !folio_contains() bug hit when
debug enabled: symptoms not seen since this patch went in.
References
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version |
|---|
{
"affected": [
{
"affectedData": [
{
"defaultStatus": "unaffected",
"product": "Linux",
"programFiles": [
"mm/filemap.c"
],
"repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
"vendor": "Linux",
"versions": [
{
"lessThan": "4917e3ebcab50f0265e8ca01c8567de4c4a47511",
"status": "affected",
"version": "200a89c159a7a416115e6e309183c82183bf98aa",
"versionType": "git"
},
{
"lessThan": "267ecd2eb7759c26f1a026eb0a5b231071534c9c",
"status": "affected",
"version": "200a89c159a7a416115e6e309183c82183bf98aa",
"versionType": "git"
},
{
"lessThan": "86da3f7e1e609e1e8bfbab198af68467c5a015a5",
"status": "affected",
"version": "200a89c159a7a416115e6e309183c82183bf98aa",
"versionType": "git"
}
]
},
{
"defaultStatus": "affected",
"product": "Linux",
"programFiles": [
"mm/filemap.c"
],
"repo": "https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git",
"vendor": "Linux",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "6.15"
},
{
"lessThan": "6.15",
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "0",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "6.18.*",
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "6.18.45",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "7.1.*",
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "7.1.9",
"versionType": "semver"
},
{
"lessThanOrEqual": "*",
"status": "unaffected",
"version": "7.2",
"versionType": "original_commit_for_fix"
}
]
}
],
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67"
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nmm/filemap: __filemap_add_folio() restore index before retrying\n\nIn __filemap_add_folio()\u0027s split-a-conflict loop, xas_set_order() is\napplied repeatedly: each application modifies xas.xa_index, rounding it\ndown according to the split_order attempted at that stage: and if all goes\nas intended, it eventually (or immediately) converges on an\nxas_try_split() to the required folio_order, with xas.xa_index now the\nsame as index: then xas_store() puts the new folio into the xarray there.\n\nBut if a new node was needed, and GFP_NOWAIT allocation did not get one,\nthe lock is dropped, xas_nomem() used to allocate, and sequence retried. \nIf (that part of) the xarray is unchanged when the lock is reacquired, no\nproblem. But what if the conflict was meanwhile resolved by another\nthread (perhaps even doing the same thing, inserting a folio at that same\nindex)? Isn\u0027t there a danger of now putting our folio into the xarray at\nan intermediate rounded-down index? With !folio_contains() bug to follow,\nwhen CONFIG_DEBUG_VM=y is checking for that.\n\nFix this with an xas_set_order() to restore the original xas.xa_index at\nthe bottom of the loop, so the retry does a full re-evaluation after\nreacquiring the lock, and cannot reach xas_store() with the wrong index.\n\nProduction was suffering from rare SIGILLs and SIGSEGVs, executable text\nfound a page away from where it belonged, !folio_contains() bug hit when\ndebug enabled: symptoms not seen since this patch went in."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-74591",
"lastModified": "2026-08-25T06:18:34.397",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"baseScore": 9.8,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
"integrityImpact": "HIGH",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
"impactScore": 5.9,
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
},
"published": "2026-08-22T16:16:31.353",
"references": [
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/267ecd2eb7759c26f1a026eb0a5b231071534c9c"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4917e3ebcab50f0265e8ca01c8567de4c4a47511"
},
{
"source": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/86da3f7e1e609e1e8bfbab198af68467c5a015a5"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67",
"vulnStatus": "Received"
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
The MITRE ATT&CK techniques below are AI-generated suggestions, inferred from the description of the
vulnerability by the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-classification-roberta-base
model, served locally by ML-Gateway.
They have not been verified by an analyst and are provided for guidance only.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Loading…
Loading…