CVE-2026-46066
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ceph: fix num_ops off-by-one when crypto allocation fails
move_dirty_folio_in_page_array() may fail if the file is encrypted, the dirty folio is not the first in the batch, and it fails to allocate a bounce buffer to hold the ciphertext. When that happens, ceph_process_folio_batch() simply redirties the folio and flushes the current batch -- it can retry that folio in a future batch.
However, if this failed folio is not contiguous with the last folio that did make it into the batch, then ceph_process_folio_batch() has already incremented ceph_wbc->num_ops; because it doesn't follow through and add the discontiguous folio to the array, ceph_submit_write() -- which expects that ceph_wbc->num_ops accurately reflects the number of contiguous ranges (and therefore the required number of "write extent" ops) in the writeback -- will panic the kernel:
BUG_ON(ceph_wbc->op_idx + 1 != req->r_num_ops);
This issue can be reproduced on affected kernels by writing to fscrypt-enabled CephFS file(s) with a 4KiB-written/4KiB-skipped/repeat pattern (total filesize should not matter) and gradually increasing the system's memory pressure until a bounce buffer allocation fails.
Fix this crash by decrementing ceph_wbc->num_ops back to the correct value when move_dirty_folio_in_page_array() fails, but the folio already started counting a new (i.e. still-empty) extent.
The defect corrected by this patch has existed since 2022 (see first Fixes:), but another bug blocked multi-folio encrypted writeback until recently (see second Fixes:). The second commit made it into 6.18.16, 6.19.6, and 7.0-rc1, unmasking the panic in those versions. This patch therefore fixes a regression (panic) introduced by cac190c7674f.
Affected products
4- Range: >=6.18.16,<6.19.6
- osv-coords2 versions
>= 6.6.0, < 6.18.30+ 1 more
- (no CPE)range: >= 6.6.0, < 6.18.30
- (no CPE)range: < 7.0.11-1.1
Patches
Vulnerability mechanics
References
3News mentions
0No linked articles in our index yet.