CVE-2026-80734: Undefined Security Weakness

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

btrfs: initialize inode mapping flags for cached inodes

[BUG] When running generic/795 with 8K block size, 4K page size, the test always fails, triggering some ASSERT()s related to folio size:

795 (241074): drop_caches: 3 assertion failed: IS_ALIGNED(start, blocksize) && IS_ALIGNED(end + 1, blocksize), in extent_io.c:1404 (blocksize=8192 root=262 ino=258 start=16826368 end=16830463 mapping min order=0) ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at extent_io.c:1404! Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP CPU: 8 UID: 0 PID: 241105 Comm: fsstress Tainted: G OE 7.2.0-rc5-custom+ #442 PREEMPT(full) f4bfb352566f3949f29c233ce6f735050a03b245 Tainted: [O]=OOT_MODULE, [E]=UNSIGNED_MODULE Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS unknown 02/02/2022 RIP: 0010:assert_folio_range.cold+0x3d/0x3f [btrfs] Call Trace: <TASK> btrfs_read_folio+0x9e/0x170 [btrfs 4cd1dd93b341b8ef766643f9512f4a86259567a3] prepare_one_folio.constprop.0+0x104/0x2a0 [btrfs 4cd1dd93b341b8ef766643f9512f4a86259567a3] btrfs_buffered_write+0x285/0xa50 [btrfs 4cd1dd93b341b8ef766643f9512f4a86259567a3] btrfs_do_write_iter+0x1aa/0x210 [btrfs 4cd1dd93b341b8ef766643f9512f4a86259567a3] iter_file_splice_write+0x31a/0x540 direct_splice_actor+0x53/0x170 splice_direct_to_actor+0xe9/0x240 do_splice_direct+0x76/0xb0 vfs_copy_file_range+0x1fd/0x630 __x64_sys_copy_file_range+0xf9/0x220 do_syscall_64+0xe1/0x790 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53 </TASK> ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---

The ASSERT() itself is added by a later patch. The crash is triggered with that new debug patch, and without this fix.

[CAUSE] In the above case, the start 16826368 is properly 8K aligned, but the end (16830463 + 1) is not 8K aligned. Furthermore the mapping's minimal folio order is 0, not the expected 1 for 8K block size with 4K page size.

So this means some inodes do not have btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order() called on it.

The missing btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order() call happens for cached inodes, through the following events:

- btrfs_create_new_inode() called for inode X Which properly sets minimal folio order for the VFS inode.

- btrfs_update_inode() called for inode X Which calls btrfs_delayed_update_inode() to create a delayed_node into root->delayed_nodes xarray.

- Drop cache/memory pressure, evicting in-memory inode X Which evicted the inode X, but delayed_node is still in root->delayed_nodes for future reuse.

- btrfs_iget() for inode X called again

btrfs_iget() |- btrfs_iget_locked() | |- iget5_locked_rcu() | Which creates a new vfs_inode for btrfs, whose mapping still | has the minimal order as 0. | |- btrfs_read_locked_inode() |- btrfs_fill_inode() | |- btrfs_get_delayed_node() | Which found out the previous node, and use that delayed | node to initialize the new inode. | |- filled = true; |- if (filled) goto cache_index; Which skips the btrfs_update_inode_mapping_flags() and btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order() calls. So the inode still has minimal folio order set as 0, not the required 1.

Thus later page cache read will get a folio whose size is smaller than block size, as the mapping has its minimal folio order set as 0 not 1, then trigger the ASSERT().

[FIX] Move the btrfs_update_inode_mapping_flags() and btrfs_set_inode_mapping_order() calls under cache_index label, so that the mapping flags and minimal folio order is always set no matter if we have a cached inode.