CVE-2021-47635
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ubifs: Fix to add refcount once page is set private MM defined the rule [1] very clearly that once page was set with PG_private flag, we should increment the refcount in that page, also main flows like pageout(), migrate_page() will assume there is one additional page reference count if page_has_private() returns true. Otherwise, we may get a BUG in page migration: page:0000000080d05b9d refcount:-1 mapcount:0 mapping:000000005f4d82a8 index:0xe2 pfn:0x14c12 aops:ubifs_file_address_operations [ubifs] ino:8f1 dentry name:"f30e" flags: 0x1fffff80002405(locked|uptodate|owner_priv_1|private|node=0| zone=1|lastcpupid=0x1fffff) page dumped because: VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(page_count(page) != 0) ------------[ cut here ]------------ kernel BUG at include/linux/page_ref.h:184! invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP CPU: 3 PID: 38 Comm: kcompactd0 Not tainted 5.15.0-rc5 RIP: 0010:migrate_page_move_mapping+0xac3/0xe70 Call Trace: ubifs_migrate_page+0x22/0xc0 [ubifs] move_to_new_page+0xb4/0x600 migrate_pages+0x1523/0x1cc0 compact_zone+0x8c5/0x14b0 kcompactd+0x2bc/0x560 kthread+0x18c/0x1e0 ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30 Before the time, we should make clean a concept, what does refcount means in page gotten from grab_cache_page_write_begin(). There are 2 situations: Situation 1: refcount is 3, page is created by __page_cache_alloc. TYPE_A - the write process is using this page TYPE_B - page is assigned to one certain mapping by calling __add_to_page_cache_locked() TYPE_C - page is added into pagevec list corresponding current cpu by calling lru_cache_add() Situation 2: refcount is 2, page is gotten from the mapping's tree TYPE_B - page has been assigned to one certain mapping TYPE_A - the write process is using this page (by calling page_cache_get_speculative()) Filesystem releases one refcount by calling put_page() in xxx_write_end(), the released refcount corresponds to TYPE_A (write task is using it). If there are any processes using a page, page migration process will skip the page by judging whether expected_page_refs() equals to page refcount. The BUG is caused by following process: PA(cpu 0) kcompactd(cpu 1) compact_zone ubifs_write_begin page_a = grab_cache_page_write_begin add_to_page_cache_lru lru_cache_add pagevec_add // put page into cpu 0's pagevec (refcnf = 3, for page creation process) ubifs_write_end SetPagePrivate(page_a) // doesn't increase page count ! unlock_page(page_a) put_page(page_a) // refcnt = 2 [...] PB(cpu 0) filemap_read filemap_get_pages add_to_page_cache_lru lru_cache_add __pagevec_lru_add // traverse all pages in cpu 0's pagevec __pagevec_lru_add_fn SetPageLRU(page_a) isolate_migratepages isolate_migratepages_block get_page_unless_zero(page_a) // refcnt = 3 list_add(page_a, from_list) migrate_pages(from_list) __unmap_and_move move_to_new_page ubifs_migrate_page(page_a) migrate_page_move_mapping expected_page_refs get 3 (migration[1] + mapping[1] + private[1]) release_pages put_page_testzero(page_a) // refcnt = 3 page_ref_freeze // refcnt = 0 page_ref_dec_and_test(0 - 1 = -1) page_ref_unfreeze VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(-1 != 0, page) UBIFS doesn't increase the page refcount after setting private flag, which leads to page migration task believes the page is not used by any other processes, so the page is migrated. This causes concurrent accessing on page refcount between put_page() called by other process(eg. read process calls lru_cache_add) and page_ref_unfreeze() called by mi ---truncated---
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 2.6.27, < 5.10.110>= 5.11, < 5.15.33>= 5.16, < 5.16.19>= 5.17, < 5.17.2CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped5.10.1105.15.335.16.19
5.10.110, 5.15.33, 5.16.19, or 5.17.2 depending on your current branch
- Identify your current Linux kernel version using `uname -r`
- Determine which kernel version branch you are running (5.10.x, 5.11.x, 5.15.x, 5.16.x, or 5.17.x)
- Upgrade to the appropriate fixed kernel version: for 5.10.x upgrade to >= 5.10.110, for 5.15.x upgrade to >= 5.15.33, for 5.16.x upgrade to >= 5.16.19, for 5.17.x upgrade to >= 5.17.2
- Apply the upgrade through your distribution's package manager (e.g., `apt-get update && apt-get upgrade` for Debian/Ubuntu, `yum update` for RHEL/CentOS, or `dnf upgrade` for Fedora)
- Reboot the system to load the patched kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and confirming the UBIFS fix commit is included
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-47635 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2021-47635 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data