In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
ftrace: Do not over-allocate ftrace memory
The pg_remaining calculation in ftrace_process_locs() assumes that
ENTRIES_PER_PAGE multiplied by 2^order equals the actual capacity of the
allocated page group. However, ENTRIES_PER_PAGE is PAGE_SIZE / ENTRY_SIZE
(integer division). When PAGE_SIZE is not a multiple of ENTRY_SIZE (e.g.
4096 / 24 = 170 with remainder 16), high-order allocations (like 256 pages)
have significantly more capacity than 256 * 170. This leads to pg_remaining
being underestimated, which in turn makes skip (derived from skipped -
pg_remaining) larger than expected, causing the WARN(skip != remaining)
to trigger.
Extra allocated pages for ftrace: 2 with 654 skipped
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at kernel/trace/ftrace.c:7295 ftrace_process_locs+0x5bf/0x5e0
A similar problem in ftrace_allocate_records() can result in allocating
too many pages. This can trigger the second warning in
ftrace_process_locs().
Extra allocated pages for ftrace
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at kernel/trace/ftrace.c:7276 ftrace_process_locs+0x548/0x580
Use the actual capacity of a page group to determine the number of pages
to allocate. Have ftrace_allocate_pages() return the number of allocated
pages to avoid having to calculate it. Use the actual page group capacity
when validating the number of unused pages due to skipped entries.
Drop the definition of ENTRIES_PER_PAGE since it is no longer used.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the BOD 26-04 block below.
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it