CVE-2025-38358 — linux / linux_kernel
Concurrent Execution using Shared Resource with Improper Synchronization ('Race Condition')In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
btrfs: fix race between async reclaim worker and close_ctree()
Syzbot reported an assertion failure due to an attempt to add a delayed iput after we have set BTRFS_FS_STATE_NO_DELAYED_IPUT in the fs_info state:
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 65 at fs/btrfs/inode.c:3420 btrfs_add_delayed_iput+0x2f8/0x370 fs/btrfs/inode.c:3420 Modules linked in: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 65 Comm: kworker/u8:4 Not tainted 6.15.0-next-20250530-syzkaller #0 PREEMPT(full) Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 05/07/2025 Workqueue: btrfs-endio-write btrfs_work_helper RIP: 0010:btrfs_add_delayed_iput+0x2f8/0x370 fs/btrfs/inode.c:3420 Code: 4e ad 5d (...) RSP: 0018:ffffc9000213f780 EFLAGS: 00010293 RAX: ffffffff83c635b7 RBX: ffff888058920000 RCX: ffff88801c769e00 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000100 RDI: 0000000000000000 RBP: 0000000000000001 R08: ffff888058921b67 R09: 1ffff1100b12436c R10: dffffc0000000000 R11: ffffed100b12436d R12: 0000000000000001 R13: dffffc0000000000 R14: ffff88807d748000 R15: 0000000000000100 FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff888125c53000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00002000000bd038 CR3: 000000006a142000 CR4: 00000000003526f0 DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 Call Trace: <TASK> btrfs_put_ordered_extent+0x19f/0x470 fs/btrfs/ordered-data.c:635 btrfs_finish_one_ordered+0x11d8/0x1b10 fs/btrfs/inode.c:3312 btrfs_work_helper+0x399/0xc20 fs/btrfs/async-thread.c:312 process_one_work kernel/workqueue.c:3238 [inline] process_scheduled_works+0xae1/0x17b0 kernel/workqueue.c:3321 worker_thread+0x8a0/0xda0 kernel/workqueue.c:3402 kthread+0x70e/0x8a0 kernel/kthread.c:464 ret_from_fork+0x3fc/0x770 arch/x86/kernel/process.c:148 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:245 </TASK>
This can happen due to a race with the async reclaim worker like this:
-
The async metadata reclaim worker enters shrink_delalloc(), which calls btrfs_start_delalloc_roots() with an nr_pages argument that has a value less than LONG_MAX, and that in turn enters start_delalloc_inodes(), which sets the local variable 'full_flush' to false because wbc->nr_to_write is less than LONG_MAX;
-
There it finds inode X in a root's delalloc list, grabs a reference for inode X (with igrab()), and triggers writeback for it with filemap_fdatawrite_wbc(), which creates an ordered extent for inode X;
-
The unmount sequence starts from another task, we enter close_ctree() and we flush the workqueue fs_info->endio_write_workers, which waits for the ordered extent for inode X to complete and when dropping the last reference of the ordered extent, with btrfs_put_ordered_extent(), when we call btrfs_add_delayed_iput() we don't add the inode to the list of delayed iputs because it has a refcount of 2, so we decrement it to 1 and return;
-
Shortly after at close_ctree() we call btrfs_run_delayed_iputs() which runs all delayed iputs, and then we set BTRFS_FS_STATE_NO_DELAYED_IPUT in the fs_info state;
-
The async reclaim worker, after calling filemap_fdatawrite_wbc(), now calls btrfs_add_delayed_iput() for inode X and there we trigger an assertion failure since the fs_info state has the flag BTRFS_FS_STATE_NO_DELAYED_IPUT set.
Fix this by setting BTRFS_FS_STATE_NO_DELAYED_IPUT only after we wait for the async reclaim workers to finish, after we call cancel_work_sync() for them at close_ctree(), and by running delayed iputs after wait for the reclaim workers to finish and before setting the bit.
This race was recently introduced by commit 19e60b2a95f5 ("btrfs: add extra warning if delayed iput is added when it's not allowed"). Without the new validation at btrfs_add_delayed_iput(), ---truncated---
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.15 | 6.15.5 |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.16-rc1 | 6.16-rc1.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.16-rc2 | 6.16-rc2.x |
| linux / linux_kernel | 6.16-rc3 | 6.16-rc3.x |
Deep Security Visibility Without the Complexity
SynScan provides clear, real-time security insights so you can monitor your attack surface, spot risks early, and act fast—without extra complexity.
- No setup fees
- 5-min deployment
- Cancel anytime
Frequently Asked Questions
A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.
CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.
A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.
Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.
Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.
SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.