btrfs: fix block group refcount race in btrfs_create_pending_block_groups()
CVE-2025-22115 · published 16 Apr 2025
How serious is it
- Severity: high, CVSS score 7.8 out of 10.
- No exploit prediction (EPSS) score yet.
- Not on the CISA list of exploited vulnerabilities.
- No public exploit in Exploit-DB.
Is your app affected by CVE-2025-22115?
Paste this prompt into Claude Code, Cursor or any AI coding tool: it runs a free Shippable scan of your project and fixes what it finds. Built with Lovable, Bolt or v0? Scan your live app. Or upload your package file.
Who is affected
- Linux Linux: 0657b20c5a76c938612f8409735a8830d257866e to < 77fd40b7ed0c3acf989a0f2a07b15a0a59ea8f96, 0657b20c5a76c938612f8409735a8830d257866e to < ee56da95f8962b86fec4ef93f866e64c8d025a58, 0657b20c5a76c938612f8409735a8830d257866e to < 9d383a6fc59271aaaf07a33b23b2eac5b9268b7a, 0657b20c5a76c938612f8409735a8830d257866e to < 2d8e5168d48a91e7a802d3003e72afb4304bebfa
- Linux Linux: 6.5
How to check
- Find out whether you run the affected product and which version, then compare it with the versions above.
How to fix
Copies a prompt for Claude Code, Cursor or Codex that asks it to check whether you run this product.
- Apply the vendor's update or mitigation from the references below. If there is none yet, limit exposure of the affected service until there is.
- If a vulnerable version was live, check your logs and rotate the secrets that server could read.
The advisory
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] <TASK>
[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] </TASK>
[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---
Check your whole app
Dependencies are only half of it. Free and read-only: before you push, run npx shippable-dev scan localhost:3000 in your project folder, no account needed. For your live app, you prove it's yours with a one-line tag first.
References
- git.kernel.org/stable/c/77fd40b7ed0c3acf989a0f2a07b15a0a59ea8f96
- git.kernel.org/stable/c/ee56da95f8962b86fec4ef93f866e64c8d025a58
- git.kernel.org/stable/c/9d383a6fc59271aaaf07a33b23b2eac5b9268b7a
- git.kernel.org/stable/c/2d8e5168d48a91e7a802d3003e72afb4304bebfa
Merged from CVE List. Last updated 25 Oct 2026. All vulnerabilities · RSS · JSON