In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs
After rename exchanging (either with the rename exchange operation or
regular renames in multiple non-atomic steps) two inodes and at least
one of them is a directory, we can end up with a log tree that contains
only of the inodes and after a power failure that can result in an attempt
to delete the other inode when it should not because it was not deleted
before the power failure. In some case that delete attempt fails when
the target inode is a directory that contains a subvolume inside it, since
the log replay code is not prepared to deal with directory entries that
point to root items (only inode items).
1) We have directories "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B) under the
same parent directory;
2) We have a file (inode C) under directory "dir1" (inode A);
3) We have a subvolume inside directory "dir2" (inode B);
4) All these inodes were persisted in a past transaction and we are
currently at transaction N;
5) We rename the file (inode C), so at btrfs_log_new_name() we update
inode C's last_unlink_trans to N;
6) We get a rename exchange for "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B),
so after the exchange "dir1" is inode B and "dir2" is inode A.
During the rename exchange we call btrfs_log_new_name() for inodes
A and B, but because they are directories, we don't update their
last_unlink_trans to N;
7) An fsync against the file (inode C) is done, and because its inode
has a last_unlink_trans with a value of N we log its parent directory
(inode A) (through btrfs_log_all_parents(), called from
btrfs_log_inode_parent()).
8) So we end up with inode B not logged, which now has the old name
of inode A. At copy_inode_items_to_log(), when logging inode A, we
did not check if we had any conflicting inode to log because inode
A has a generation lower than the current transaction (created in
a past transaction);
9) After a power failure, when replaying the log tree, since we find that
inode A has a new name that conflicts with the name of inode B in the
fs tree, we attempt to delete inode B... this is wrong since that
directory was never deleted before the power failure, and because there
is a subvolume inside that directory, attempting to delete it will fail
since replay_dir_deletes() and btrfs_unlink_inode() are not prepared
to deal with dir items that point to roots instead of inodes.
When that happens the mount fails and we get a stack trace like the
following:
[87.2314] BTRFS info (device dm-0): start tree-log replay
[87.2318] BTRFS critical (device dm-0): failed to delete reference to subvol, root 5 inode 256 parent 259
[87.2332] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[87.2338] BTRFS: Transaction aborted (error -2)
[87.2346] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 638968 at fs/btrfs/inode.c:4345 __btrfs_unlink_inode+0x416/0x440 [btrfs]
[87.2368] Modules linked in: btrfs loop dm_thin_pool (...)
[87.2470] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 638968 Comm: mount Tainted: G W 6.18.0-rc7-btrfs-next-218+ #2 PREEMPT(full)
[87.2489] Tainted: [W]=WARN
[87.2494] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.16.2-0-gea1b7a073390-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
[87.2514] RIP: 0010:__btrfs_unlink_inode+0x416/0x440 [btrfs]
[87.2538] Code: c0 89 04 24 (...)
[87.2568] RSP: 0018:ffffc0e741f4b9b8 EFLAGS: 00010286
[87.2574] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9d3ec8a6cf60 RCX: 0000000000000000
[87.2582] RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: ffffffff84ab45a1 RDI: 00000000ffffffff
[87.2591] RBP: ffff9d3ec8a6ef20 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffc0e741f4b840
[87.2599] R10: ffff9d45dc1fffa8 R11: 0000000000000003 R12: ffff9d3ee26d77e0
[87.2608] R13: ffffc0e741f4ba98 R14: ffff9d4458040800 R15: ffff9d44b6b7ca10
[87.2618] FS: 00007f7b9603a840(0000) GS:ffff9d4658982000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[87.
---truncated---
btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs
After rename exchanging (either with the rename exchange operation or
regular renames in multiple non-atomic steps) two inodes and at least
one of them is a directory, we can end up with a log tree that contains
only of the inodes and after a power failure that can result in an attempt
to delete the other inode when it should not because it was not deleted
before the power failure. In some case that delete attempt fails when
the target inode is a directory that contains a subvolume inside it, since
the log replay code is not prepared to deal with directory entries that
point to root items (only inode items).
1) We have directories "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B) under the
same parent directory;
2) We have a file (inode C) under directory "dir1" (inode A);
3) We have a subvolume inside directory "dir2" (inode B);
4) All these inodes were persisted in a past transaction and we are
currently at transaction N;
5) We rename the file (inode C), so at btrfs_log_new_name() we update
inode C's last_unlink_trans to N;
6) We get a rename exchange for "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B),
so after the exchange "dir1" is inode B and "dir2" is inode A.
During the rename exchange we call btrfs_log_new_name() for inodes
A and B, but because they are directories, we don't update their
last_unlink_trans to N;
7) An fsync against the file (inode C) is done, and because its inode
has a last_unlink_trans with a value of N we log its parent directory
(inode A) (through btrfs_log_all_parents(), called from
btrfs_log_inode_parent()).
8) So we end up with inode B not logged, which now has the old name
of inode A. At copy_inode_items_to_log(), when logging inode A, we
did not check if we had any conflicting inode to log because inode
A has a generation lower than the current transaction (created in
a past transaction);
9) After a power failure, when replaying the log tree, since we find that
inode A has a new name that conflicts with the name of inode B in the
fs tree, we attempt to delete inode B... this is wrong since that
directory was never deleted before the power failure, and because there
is a subvolume inside that directory, attempting to delete it will fail
since replay_dir_deletes() and btrfs_unlink_inode() are not prepared
to deal with dir items that point to roots instead of inodes.
When that happens the mount fails and we get a stack trace like the
following:
[87.2314] BTRFS info (device dm-0): start tree-log replay
[87.2318] BTRFS critical (device dm-0): failed to delete reference to subvol, root 5 inode 256 parent 259
[87.2332] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[87.2338] BTRFS: Transaction aborted (error -2)
[87.2346] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 638968 at fs/btrfs/inode.c:4345 __btrfs_unlink_inode+0x416/0x440 [btrfs]
[87.2368] Modules linked in: btrfs loop dm_thin_pool (...)
[87.2470] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 638968 Comm: mount Tainted: G W 6.18.0-rc7-btrfs-next-218+ #2 PREEMPT(full)
[87.2489] Tainted: [W]=WARN
[87.2494] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.16.2-0-gea1b7a073390-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
[87.2514] RIP: 0010:__btrfs_unlink_inode+0x416/0x440 [btrfs]
[87.2538] Code: c0 89 04 24 (...)
[87.2568] RSP: 0018:ffffc0e741f4b9b8 EFLAGS: 00010286
[87.2574] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9d3ec8a6cf60 RCX: 0000000000000000
[87.2582] RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: ffffffff84ab45a1 RDI: 00000000ffffffff
[87.2591] RBP: ffff9d3ec8a6ef20 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffc0e741f4b840
[87.2599] R10: ffff9d45dc1fffa8 R11: 0000000000000003 R12: ffff9d3ee26d77e0
[87.2608] R13: ffffc0e741f4ba98 R14: ffff9d4458040800 R15: ffff9d44b6b7ca10
[87.2618] FS: 00007f7b9603a840(0000) GS:ffff9d4658982000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[87.
---truncated---
Metrics
Affected Vendors & Products
Advisories
No advisories yet.
Fixes
Solution
No solution given by the vendor.
Workaround
No workaround given by the vendor.
References
History
Sat, 31 Jan 2026 20:45:00 +0900
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs After rename exchanging (either with the rename exchange operation or regular renames in multiple non-atomic steps) two inodes and at least one of them is a directory, we can end up with a log tree that contains only of the inodes and after a power failure that can result in an attempt to delete the other inode when it should not because it was not deleted before the power failure. In some case that delete attempt fails when the target inode is a directory that contains a subvolume inside it, since the log replay code is not prepared to deal with directory entries that point to root items (only inode items). 1) We have directories "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B) under the same parent directory; 2) We have a file (inode C) under directory "dir1" (inode A); 3) We have a subvolume inside directory "dir2" (inode B); 4) All these inodes were persisted in a past transaction and we are currently at transaction N; 5) We rename the file (inode C), so at btrfs_log_new_name() we update inode C's last_unlink_trans to N; 6) We get a rename exchange for "dir1" (inode A) and "dir2" (inode B), so after the exchange "dir1" is inode B and "dir2" is inode A. During the rename exchange we call btrfs_log_new_name() for inodes A and B, but because they are directories, we don't update their last_unlink_trans to N; 7) An fsync against the file (inode C) is done, and because its inode has a last_unlink_trans with a value of N we log its parent directory (inode A) (through btrfs_log_all_parents(), called from btrfs_log_inode_parent()). 8) So we end up with inode B not logged, which now has the old name of inode A. At copy_inode_items_to_log(), when logging inode A, we did not check if we had any conflicting inode to log because inode A has a generation lower than the current transaction (created in a past transaction); 9) After a power failure, when replaying the log tree, since we find that inode A has a new name that conflicts with the name of inode B in the fs tree, we attempt to delete inode B... this is wrong since that directory was never deleted before the power failure, and because there is a subvolume inside that directory, attempting to delete it will fail since replay_dir_deletes() and btrfs_unlink_inode() are not prepared to deal with dir items that point to roots instead of inodes. When that happens the mount fails and we get a stack trace like the following: [87.2314] BTRFS info (device dm-0): start tree-log replay [87.2318] BTRFS critical (device dm-0): failed to delete reference to subvol, root 5 inode 256 parent 259 [87.2332] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [87.2338] BTRFS: Transaction aborted (error -2) [87.2346] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 638968 at fs/btrfs/inode.c:4345 __btrfs_unlink_inode+0x416/0x440 [btrfs] [87.2368] Modules linked in: btrfs loop dm_thin_pool (...) [87.2470] CPU: 1 UID: 0 PID: 638968 Comm: mount Tainted: G W 6.18.0-rc7-btrfs-next-218+ #2 PREEMPT(full) [87.2489] Tainted: [W]=WARN [87.2494] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS rel-1.16.2-0-gea1b7a073390-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 [87.2514] RIP: 0010:__btrfs_unlink_inode+0x416/0x440 [btrfs] [87.2538] Code: c0 89 04 24 (...) [87.2568] RSP: 0018:ffffc0e741f4b9b8 EFLAGS: 00010286 [87.2574] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff9d3ec8a6cf60 RCX: 0000000000000000 [87.2582] RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: ffffffff84ab45a1 RDI: 00000000ffffffff [87.2591] RBP: ffff9d3ec8a6ef20 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffc0e741f4b840 [87.2599] R10: ffff9d45dc1fffa8 R11: 0000000000000003 R12: ffff9d3ee26d77e0 [87.2608] R13: ffffc0e741f4ba98 R14: ffff9d4458040800 R15: ffff9d44b6b7ca10 [87.2618] FS: 00007f7b9603a840(0000) GS:ffff9d4658982000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [87. ---truncated--- | |
| Title | btrfs: always detect conflicting inodes when logging inode refs | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
|
Projects
Sign in to view the affected projects.
MITRE
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-01-31T11:38:56.067Z
Reserved: 2026-01-31T11:36:51.186Z
Link: CVE-2025-71183
Vulnrichment
No data.
NVD
Status : Received
Published: 2026-01-31T12:16:03.570
Modified: 2026-01-31T12:16:03.570
Link: CVE-2025-71183
Redhat
No data.
OpenCVE Enrichment
No data.
Weaknesses
No weakness.