Skip to main content

Linux CVE-2025-39738

HIGH
2025-09-11 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
7.8
CVSS 3.1 · NVD
Share

Severity by source

NVD PRIMARY
7.8 HIGH
AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
SUSE
HIGH
qualitative
Red Hat
5.5 MEDIUM
qualitative

Primary rating from NVD.

CVSS VectorNVD

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Attack Vector
Local
Attack Complexity
Low
Privileges Required
Low
User Interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Lifecycle Timeline

3
Analysis Generated
Mar 28, 2026 - 19:11 vuln.today
Patch released
Mar 28, 2026 - 19:11 nvd
Patch available
CVE Published
Sep 11, 2025 - 17:15 nvd
HIGH 7.8

DescriptionCVE.org

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

btrfs: do not allow relocation of partially dropped subvolumes

[BUG] There is an internal report that balance triggered transaction abort, with the following call trace:

item 85 key (594509824 169 0) itemoff 12599 itemsize 33 extent refs 1 gen 197740 flags 2 ref#0: tree block backref root 7 item 86 key (594558976 169 0) itemoff 12566 itemsize 33 extent refs 1 gen 197522 flags 2 ref#0: tree block backref root 7 ... BTRFS error (device loop0): extent item not found for insert, bytenr 594526208 num_bytes 16384 parent 449921024 root_objectid 934 owner 1 offset 0 BTRFS error (device loop0): failed to run delayed ref for logical 594526208 num_bytes 16384 type 182 action 1 ref_mod 1: -117 ------------[ cut here ]------------ BTRFS: Transaction aborted (error -117) WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 6963 at ../fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:2168 btrfs_run_delayed_refs+0xfa/0x110 [btrfs]

And btrfs check doesn't report anything wrong related to the extent tree.

[CAUSE] The cause is a little complex, firstly the extent tree indeed doesn't have the backref for 594526208.

The extent tree only have the following two backrefs around that bytenr on-disk:

item 65 key (594509824 METADATA_ITEM 0) itemoff 13880 itemsize 33 refs 1 gen 197740 flags TREE_BLOCK tree block skinny level 0 (176 0x7) tree block backref root CSUM_TREE item 66 key (594558976 METADATA_ITEM 0) itemoff 13847 itemsize 33 refs 1 gen 197522 flags TREE_BLOCK tree block skinny level 0 (176 0x7) tree block backref root CSUM_TREE

But the such missing backref item is not an corruption on disk, as the offending delayed ref belongs to subvolume 934, and that subvolume is being dropped:

item 0 key (934 ROOT_ITEM 198229) itemoff 15844 itemsize 439 generation 198229 root_dirid 256 bytenr 10741039104 byte_limit 0 bytes_used 345571328 last_snapshot 198229 flags 0x1000000000001(RDONLY) refs 0 drop_progress key (206324 EXTENT_DATA 2711650304) drop_level 2 level 2 generation_v2 198229

And that offending tree block 594526208 is inside the dropped range of that subvolume. That explains why there is no backref item for that bytenr and why btrfs check is not reporting anything wrong.

But this also shows another problem, as btrfs will do all the orphan subvolume cleanup at a read-write mount.

So half-dropped subvolume should not exist after an RW mount, and balance itself is also exclusive to subvolume cleanup, meaning we shouldn't hit a subvolume half-dropped during relocation.

The root cause is, there is no orphan item for this subvolume. In fact there are 5 subvolumes from around 2021 that have the same problem.

It looks like the original report has some older kernels running, and caused those zombie subvolumes.

Thankfully upstream commit 8d488a8c7ba2 ("btrfs: fix subvolume/snapshot deletion not triggered on mount") has long fixed the bug.

[ENHANCEMENT] For repairing such old fs, btrfs-progs will be enhanced.

Considering how delayed the problem will show up (at run delayed ref time) and at that time we have to abort transaction already, it is too late.

Instead here we reject any half-dropped subvolume for reloc tree at the earliest time, preventing confusion and extra time wasted on debugging similar bugs.

AnalysisAI

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: do not allow relocation of partially dropped subvolumes [BUG] There is an internal report that balance triggered transaction. Rated high severity (CVSS 7.8), this vulnerability is low attack complexity.

Technical ContextAI

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: do not allow relocation of partially dropped subvolumes [BUG] There is an internal report that balance triggered transaction abort, with the following call trace: item 85 key (594509824 169 0) itemoff 12599 itemsize 33 extent refs 1 gen 197740 flags 2 ref#0: tree block backref root 7 item 86 key (594558976 169 0) itemoff 12566 itemsize 33 extent refs 1 gen 197522 flags 2 ref#0: tree block backref root 7 ... BTRFS error (device loop0): extent item not found for insert, bytenr 594526208 num_bytes 16384 parent 449921024 root_objectid 934 owner 1 offset 0 BTRFS error (device loop0): failed to run delayed ref for logical 594526208 num_bytes 16384 type 182 action 1 ref_mod 1: -117 ------------[ cut here ]------------ BTRFS: Transaction aborted (error -117) WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 6963 at ../fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c:2168 btrfs_run_delayed_refs+0xfa/0x110 [btrfs] And btrfs check doesn't report anything wrong related to the extent tree. [CAUSE] The cause is a little complex, firstly the extent tree indeed doesn't have the backref for 594526208. The extent tree only have the following two backrefs around that bytenr on-disk: item 65 key (594509824 METADATA_ITEM 0) itemoff 13880 itemsize 33 refs 1 gen 197740 flags TREE_BLOCK tree block skinny level 0 (176 0x7) tree block backref root CSUM_TREE item 66 key (594558976 METADATA_ITEM 0) itemoff 13847 itemsize 33 refs 1 gen 197522 flags TREE_BLOCK tree block skinny level 0 (176 0x7) tree block backref root CSUM_TREE But the such missing backref item is not an corruption on disk, as the offending delayed ref belongs to subvolume 934, and that subvolume is being dropped: item 0 key (934 ROOT_ITEM 198229) itemoff 15844 itemsize 439 generation 198229 root_dirid 256 bytenr 10741039104 byte_limit 0 bytes_used 345571328 last_snapshot 198229 flags 0x1000000000001(RDONLY) refs 0 drop_progress key (206324 EXTENT_DATA 2711650304) drop_level 2 level 2 generation_v2 198229 And that offending tree block 594526208 is inside the dropped range of that subvolume. That explains why there is no backref item for that bytenr and why btrfs check is not reporting anything wrong. But this also shows another problem, as btrfs will do all the orphan subvolume cleanup at a read-write mount. So half-dropped subvolume should not exist after an RW mount, and balance itself is also exclusive to subvolume cleanup, meaning we shouldn't hit a subvolume half-dropped during relocation. The root cause is, there is no orphan item for this subvolume. In fact there are 5 subvolumes from around 2021 that have the same problem. It looks like the original report has some older kernels running, and caused those zombie subvolumes. Thankfully upstream commit 8d488a8c7ba2 ("btrfs: fix subvolume/snapshot deletion not triggered on mount") has long fixed the bug. [ENHANCEMENT] For repairing such old fs, btrfs-progs will be enhanced. Considering how delayed the problem will show up (at run delayed ref time) and at that time we have to abort transaction already, it is too late. Instead here we reject any half-dropped subvolume for reloc tree at the earliest time, preventing confusion and extra time wasted on debugging similar bugs. Affected products include: Linux Linux Kernel, Debian Debian Linux.

RemediationAI

A vendor patch is available. Apply the latest security update as soon as possible. Apply vendor patches when available. Implement network segmentation and monitoring as interim mitigations.

Vendor StatusVendor

SUSE

Severity: High
Product Status
Container suse/sl-micro/6.0/base-os-container:2.1.3-7.57 Container suse/sl-micro/6.1/base-os-container:2.2.1-5.40 Image SL-Micro Image SL-Micro-Azure Image SL-Micro-BYOS-Azure Image SL-Micro-BYOS-EC2 Image SL-Micro-BYOS-GCE Image SL-Micro-EC2 Image SLE-Micro Image SLE-Micro-Azure Image SLE-Micro-BYOS Image SLE-Micro-BYOS-Azure Image SLE-Micro-BYOS-EC2 Image SLE-Micro-BYOS-GCE Image SLE-Micro-EC2 Image SLE-Micro-GCE Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Proxy-BYOS-Azure Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Proxy-BYOS-EC2 Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Proxy-BYOS-GCE Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-Azure-llc Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-Azure-ltd Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-BYOS-Azure Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-BYOS-EC2 Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-BYOS-GCE Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-EC2-llc Image SUSE-Multi-Linux-Manager-Server-EC2-ltd Affected
Container suse/sl-micro/6.0/kvm-os-container:2.1.3-6.80 Container suse/sl-micro/6.1/kvm-os-container:2.2.1-5.41 Affected
Container suse/sl-micro/6.0/rt-os-container:2.1.3-7.95 Container suse/sl-micro/6.1/rt-os-container:2.2.1-5.34 Affected
Image SLES-Azure-3P Image SLES-Azure-Basic Image SLES-Azure-Standard Image SLES-BYOS-Azure Image SLES-BYOS-EC2 Image SLES-BYOS-GCE Image SLES-CHOST-BYOS-Aliyun Image SLES-CHOST-BYOS-Azure Image SLES-CHOST-BYOS-EC2 Image SLES-CHOST-BYOS-GCE Image SLES-CHOST-BYOS-GDC Image SLES-CHOST-BYOS-SAP-CCloud Image SLES-EC2 Image SLES-GCE Image SLES-Hardened-BYOS-Azure Image SLES-Hardened-BYOS-EC2 Image SLES-Hardened-BYOS-GCE Image SLES-SAPCAL-Azure Image SLES-SAPCAL-EC2 Image SLES-SAPCAL-GCE Affected
Image SLES-SAP-Azure Image SLES-SAP-Azure-3P Image SLES-SAP-BYOS-Azure Image SLES-SAP-BYOS-EC2 Image SLES-SAP-BYOS-GCE Image SLES-SAP-GCE Affected

Share

CVE-2025-39738 vulnerability details – vuln.today

This site uses cookies essential for authentication and security. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Privacy Policy