<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2026 20:35:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2023-52668 — btrfs: zoned: fix lock ordering in btrfs_zone_activate()</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2023-52668</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;btrfs: zoned: fix lock ordering in btrfs_zone_activate()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The btrfs CI reported a lockdep warning as follows by running generic
generic/129.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
   6.7.0-rc5+ #1 Not tainted
   ------------------------------------------------------
   kworker/u5:5/793427 is trying to acquire lock:
   ffff88813256d028 (&amp;amp;cache-&amp;gt;lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_zone_finish_one_bg+0x5e/0x130
   but task is already holding lock:
   ffff88810a23a318 (&amp;amp;fs_info-&amp;gt;zone_active_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_zone_finish_one_bg+0x34/0x130
   which lock already depends on the new lock.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
   -&amp;gt; #1 (&amp;amp;fs_info-&amp;gt;zone_active_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}:
   ...
   -&amp;gt; #0 (&amp;amp;cache-&amp;gt;lock){+.+.}-{2:2}:
   ...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is because we take fs_info-&amp;gt;zone_active_bgs_lock after a block_group&amp;#39;s
lock in btrfs_zone_activate() while doing the opposite in other places.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix the issue by expanding the fs_info-&amp;gt;zone_active_bgs_lock&amp;#39;s critical
section and taking it before a block_group&amp;#39;s lock.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;btrfs: zoned: fix lock ordering in btrfs_zone_activate()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The btrfs CI reported a lockdep warning as follows by running generic
generic/129.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected
   6.7.0-rc5+ #1 Not tainted
   ------------------------------------------------------
   kworker/u5:5/793427 is trying to acquire lock:
   ffff88813256d028 (&amp;amp;cache-&amp;gt;lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_zone_finish_one_bg+0x5e/0x130
   but task is already holding lock:
   ffff88810a23a318 (&amp;amp;fs_info-&amp;gt;zone_active_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: btrfs_zone_finish_one_bg+0x34/0x130
   which lock already depends on the new lock.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is:
   -&amp;gt; #1 (&amp;amp;fs_info-&amp;gt;zone_active_bgs_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}:
   ...
   -&amp;gt; #0 (&amp;amp;cache-&amp;gt;lock){+.+.}-{2:2}:
   ...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is because we take fs_info-&amp;gt;zone_active_bgs_lock after a block_group&amp;#39;s
lock in btrfs_zone_activate() while doing the opposite in other places.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fix the issue by expanding the fs_info-&amp;gt;zone_active_bgs_lock&amp;#39;s critical
section and taking it before a block_group&amp;#39;s lock.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2023-52668</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
