Overview
About vulnerability
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
smb: Log an error when close_all_cached_dirs fails
Under low-memory conditions, close_all_cached_dirs() can’t move the dentries to a separate list to dput() them once the locks are dropped. This will result in a “Dentry still in use” error, so add an error message that makes it clear this is what happened:
[ 495.281119] CIFS: VFS: \otters.example.com\share Out of memory while dropping dentries [ 495.281595] ————[ cut here ]———— [ 495.281887] BUG: Dentry ffff888115531138{i=78,n=/} still in use (2) [unmount of cifs cifs] [ 495.282391] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 2329 at fs/dcache.c:1536 umount_check+0xc8/0xf0
Also, bail out of looping through all tcons as soon as a single allocation fails, since we’re already in trouble, and kmalloc() attempts for subseqeuent tcons are likely to fail just like the first one did.
Details
- Affected product:
- AlmaLinux 9.2 ESU , CentOS 6 ELS , CentOS 7 ELS , CentOS 8.4 ELS , CentOS 8.5 ELS , CentOS Stream 8 ELS , CloudLinux 7 ELS , Oracle Linux 6 ELS , Oracle Linux 7 ELS , RHEL 7 ELS , TuxCare 9.6 ESU , Ubuntu 16.04 ELS , Ubuntu 18.04 ELS , Ubuntu 20.04 ELS
- Affected packages:
- kernel @ 4.18.0 (+15 more)
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
smb: Log an error when close_all_cached_dirs fails
Under low-memory conditions, close_all_cached_dirs() can’t move the dentries to a separate list to dput() them once the locks are dropped. This will result in a “Dentry still in use” error, so add an error message that makes it clear this is what happened:
[ 495.281119] CIFS: VFS: \otters.example.com\share Out of memory while dropping dentries [ 495.281595] ————[ cut here ]———— [ 495.281887] BUG: Dentry ffff888115531138{i=78,n=/} still in use (2) [unmount of cifs cifs] [ 495.282391] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 2329 at fs/dcache.c:1536 umount_check+0xc8/0xf0
Also, bail out of looping through all tcons as soon as a single allocation fails, since we’re already in trouble, and kmalloc() attempts for subseqeuent tcons are likely to fail just like the first one did.