Affected: Alpaquita:23: linux-lts, Alpaquita:25: linux-lts, Alpaquita:stream: linux-lts

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

btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages

[BUG] There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump.

The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to any upstream kernel before v6.18.

[CAUSE] From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first.

This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty limit for it was something like 16MB.

Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty (significantly) more dirty memory than there's dirty limit. Thus when a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages() and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying.

When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the limit.

So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty pages in th…

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

btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages

[BUG] There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump.

The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to any upstream kernel before v6.18.

[CAUSE] From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first.

This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty limit for it was something like 16MB.

Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty (significantly) more dirty memory than there's dirty limit. Thus when a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages() and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying.

When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the limit.

So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty pages in th…

Security update for the Linux Kernel

Security update for the Linux Kernel

Affected: Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux, Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-aws, Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: linux-lts-xenial, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-aws, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-aws-hwe, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-azure, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-gcp, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: linux-hwe and 232 more

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: btrfs: do not strictly require dirty metadata threshold for metadata writepages [BUG] There is an internal report that over 1000 processes are waiting at the io_schedule_timeout() of balance_dirty_pages(), causing a system hang and trigger a kernel coredump. The kernel is v6.4 kernel based, but the root problem still applies to any upstream kernel before v6.18. [CAUSE] From Jan Kara for his wisdom on the dirty page balance behavior first. This cgroup dirty limit was what was actually playing the role here because the cgroup had only a small amount of memory and so the dirty limit for it was something like 16MB. Dirty throttling is responsible for enforcing that nobody can dirty (significantly) more dirty memory than there's dirty limit. Thus when a task is dirtying pages it periodically enters into balance_dirty_pages() and we let it sleep there to slow down the dirtying. When the system is over dirty limit already (either globally or within a cgroup of the running task), we will not let the task exit from balance_dirty_pages() until the number of dirty pages drops below the limit. So in this particular case, as I already mentioned, there was a cgroup with relatively small amount of memory and as a result with dirty limit set at 16MB. A task from that cgroup has dirtied about 28MB worth of pages in btrfs btree inode and these were practically the only dirty pages in that cgrou…

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen im Linux-Kernel ausnutzen, um nicht näher spezifizierte Angriffe durchzuführen, die möglicherweise zu einer Denial-of-Service- Bedingung führen oder eine Speicherbeschädigung verursachen können.