FlawAtlas
Search the atlas
CVE-2026-31703 Not scored

writeback: Fix use after free in inode_switch_wbs_work_fn()

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: writeback: Fix use after free in inode_switch_wbs_work_fn() inode_switch_wbs_work_fn() has a loop like: wb_get(new_wb); while (1) { list = llist_del_all(&new_wb->switch_wbs_ctxs); /* Nothing to do? */ if (!list) break; ... process the items ... } Now adding of items to the list looks like: wb_queue_isw() if (llist_add(&isw->list, &wb->switch_wbs_ctxs)) queue_work(isw_wq, &wb->switch_work); Because inode_switch_wbs_work_fn() loops when processing isw items, it can happen that wb->switch_work is pending while wb->switch_wbs_ctxs is empty. This is a problem because in that case wb can get freed (no isw items -> no wb reference) while the work is still pending causing use-after-free issues. We cannot just fix this by cancelling work when freeing wb because that could still trigger problematic 0 -> 1 transitions on wb refcount due to wb_get() in inode_switch_wbs_work_fn(). It could be all handled with more careful code but that seems unnecessarily complex so let's avoid that until it is proven that the looping actually brings practical benefit. Just remove the loop from inode_switch_wbs_work_fn() instead. That way when wb_queue_isw() queues work, we are guaranteed we have added the first item to wb->switch_wbs_ctxs and nobody is going to remove it (and drop the wb reference it holds) until the queued work runs.

Exploit probability 0.1%
Published May 1, 2026
Required by Not available
Last source change July 16, 2026

02 / AFFECTED SOFTWARE

Affected packages

Unknown Unknown
Linux Kernel

03 / CONNECTIONS

Connected vulnerabilities

04 / EVIDENCE

Source records

Open Source Vulnerabilities CVE-2026-31703

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: writeback: Fix use after free in inode_switch_wbs_work_fn() inode_switch_wbs_work_fn() has a loop like: wb_get(new_wb); while (1) { list = llist_del_all(&new_wb->switch_wbs_ctxs); /* Nothing to do? */ if (!list) break; ... process the items ... } Now adding of items to the list looks like: wb_queue_isw() if (llist_add(&isw->list, &wb->switch_wbs_ctxs)) queue_work(isw_wq, &wb->switch_work); Because inode_switch_wbs_work_fn() loops when processing isw items, it can happen that wb->switch_work is pending while wb->switch_wbs_ctxs is empty. This is a problem because in that case wb can get freed (no isw items -> no wb reference) while the work is still pending causing use-after-free issues. We cannot just fix this by cancelling work when freeing wb because that could still trigger problematic 0 -> 1 transitions on wb refcount due to wb_get() in inode_switch_wbs_work_fn(). It could be all handled with more careful code but that seems unnecessarily complex so let's avoid that until it is proven that the looping actually brings practical benefit. Just remove the loop from inode_switch_wbs_work_fn() instead. That way when wb_queue_isw() queues work, we are guaranteed we have added the first item to wb->switch_wbs_ctxs and nobody is going to remove it (and drop the wb reference it holds) until the queued work runs.

View original source

05 / REFERENCES

Further evidence