mm/filemap: __filemap_add_folio() restore index before retrying
CVSS score
9.8
EPSS probability
%0.6
Risk score
0.1
Published
1 mo ago
Resmî kaynaklarda yeterli kanıt bulunamadı. Bu sonuç “yama yok” anlamına gelmez.
Impact on My Inventory
Only the personal products you have added to your account are assessed; an organisation's inventory does not appear here.
Checking session…
Vulnerability description
DayBreach CVE AI Research
CVE-2026-74591 has vendor, distribution, patch and security-source records on file. We can compare them and prepare an explanation linked to the evidence.
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.
IMPACT: Affected Products and Software
RED HAT CSAF/VEX: Product Impact Check
SCORING: CVSS from Multiple Sources
CVSS Scores
The Common Vulnerability Scoring System is a standardised framework for assessing the severity of vulnerabilities in software and systems. We collect and display CVSS scores from several sources for each CVE.
| SCORE | VERSION | SEVERITY | VECTOR | SOURCE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.8 | CVSS V3_1 | CRITICAL | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H | CVE CNA |
| 9.8 | CVSS V31 | CRITICAL | CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H | NVD |
Patch and Remediation Guide
Solution & Remediation Advisory
İncelenen resmî kaynaklarda yama durumu doğrulanamadı. Bu sonuç “yama yok” anlamına gelmez.
Public exploit and active exploitation status
Verified exploit intelligence
No verified public PoC, exploit repository or Metasploit module has been found for this CVE yet.
Weakness Classification and Attack Patterns (CWE & CAPEC)
CWE - Common Weakness Enumeration
While CVE identifies specific instances of vulnerabilities, CWE categorises the common flaws or weaknesses that can lead to vulnerabilities. CVE-2026-74591 is associated with the following CWEs:
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC)
Common Attack Pattern Enumeration and Classification (CAPEC) stores attack patterns, which are descriptions of the common attributes and approaches employed by adversaries to exploit the CVE-2026-74591 weaknesses.
Attack Vector and Accessibility
Official Sources and Advisories
CVSS Vector Radar Chart
9.8 / 10Vulnerability Scoring Details
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HYama durumu bilinmiyor
Similar Vulnerabilities
Get this vulnerability through the API
Affected products, version ranges, exploitation status and patch information in a single request, with a free key.
curl -H "x-api-key: $DAYBREACH_API_KEY" \ "https://api.daybreach.dev/api/v1/intel/cves/CVE-2026-74591"