CVE-2023-54023

btrfs: fix race between balance and cancel/pause

N/A
Published: December 24, 2025 at 10:55 AM UTC
Updated: June 17, 2026 at 06:46 AM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorLinux Kernel

Using Linux by Linux?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Linux - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
N/A
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.2%

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: fix race between balance and cancel/pause Syzbot reported a panic that looks like this: assertion failed: fs_info->exclusive_operation == BTRFS_EXCLOP_BALANCE_PAUSED, in fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:465 ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at fs/btrfs/messages.c:259! RIP: 0010:btrfs_assertfail+0x2c/0x30 fs/btrfs/messages.c:259 Call Trace: <TASK> btrfs_exclop_balance fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:465 [inline] btrfs_ioctl_balance fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:3564 [inline] btrfs_ioctl+0x531e/0x5b30 fs/btrfs/ioctl.c:4632 vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:51 [inline] __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:870 [inline] __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:856 [inline] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x197/0x210 fs/ioctl.c:856 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x39/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd The reproducer is running a balance and a cancel or pause in parallel. The way balance finishes is a bit wonky, if we were paused we need to save the balance_ctl in the fs_info, but clear it otherwise and cleanup. However we rely on the return values being specific errors, or having a cancel request or no pause request. If balance completes and returns 0, but we have a pause or cancel request we won't do the appropriate cleanup, and then the next time we try to start a balance we'll trip this ASSERT. The error handling is just wrong here, we always want to clean up, unless we got -ECANCELLED and we set the appropriate pause flag in the exclusive op. With this patch the reproducer ran for an hour without tripping, previously it would trip in less than a few minutes.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

3.3 ≤ v < 6.1.423.3 ≤ v < 6.4.73.3 ≤ v < 6.53.3837d5b6e46d1a4af5b6cc8f2fe83cb5de79a2961
Vendor states this is fixed in 72efe5d44821e38540888a5fe3ff3d0faab6acad (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in b19c98f237cd76981aaded52c258ce93f7daa8cb (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in ddf7e8984c83aee9122552529f4e77291903f8d9 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 3.3 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.1.42 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.4.7 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.5 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet, and no fixed version or vendor advisory is recorded against it.

Quick Info

StatusDEFERRED

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card