Linux Kernel up to 7.2.6/7.3-rc2 XFS Directory Repair xfs_da_btree.c xrep_dir_swap_prep Total assertion

CVSS Meta Temp Score
CVSS is a standardized scoring system to determine possibilities of attacks. The Temp Score considers temporal factors like disclosure, exploit and countermeasures. The unique Meta Score calculates the average score of different sources to provide a normalized scoring system.
Current Exploit Price (≈)
Our analysts are monitoring exploit markets and are in contact with vulnerability brokers. The range indicates the observed or calculated exploit price to be seen on exploit markets. A good indicator to understand the monetary effort required for and the popularity of an attack.
CTI Interest Score
Our Cyber Threat Intelligence team is monitoring different web sites, mailing lists, exploit markets and social media networks. The CTI Interest Score identifies the interest of attackers and the security community for this specific vulnerability in real-time. A high score indicates an elevated risk to be targeted for this vulnerability.
3.8$0-$5k0.00

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in Linux Kernel up to 7.2.6/7.3-rc2. This affects the function xrep_dir_swap_prep of the file fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_da_btree.c of the component XFS Directory Repair. This manipulation of the argument Total causes assertion. This vulnerability is registered as CVE-2026-97549. The attack needs to be launched locally. No exploit is available. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in Linux Kernel up to 7.2.6/7.3-rc2. Affected by this vulnerability is the function xrep_dir_swap_prep of the file fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_da_btree.c of the component XFS Directory Repair. The manipulation of the argument total with an unknown input leads to a assertion vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-617. The product contains an assert() or similar statement that can be triggered by an attacker, which leads to an application exit or other behavior that is more severe than necessary. As an impact it is known to affect integrity, and availability. The summary by CVE is:

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: xfs: fix under-reservation of blocks when repairing sf directories Whilst running QA on XFS for-next as of 7.3-rc2 with MKFS_OPTIONS="-n size=8192", I observed the following (trimmed) dmesg splat: XFS: Assertion failed: args->total >= dp->i_nblocks - nblks, file: fs/xfs/libxfs/xfs_da_btree.c, line: 2387 WARNING: fs/xfs/xfs_message.c:104 at assfail+0x46/0x4a [xfs], CPU#0: xfs_scrub/1426511 CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1426511 Comm: xfs_scrub Tainted: G W 7.3.0-rc2-djwx #rc2 PREEMPT(lazy) 6e418570b606a39783b0e7e7b30dc407b965f9e8 Tainted: [W]=WARN RIP: 0010:assfail+0x46/0x4a [xfs] RSP: 0018:ffffc900010d7890 EFLAGS: 00010246 RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00000000ffffffd1 RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: 0000000000000021 RDI: ffffffffa059fd38 RBP: 0000000000000002 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 R10: 000000000000000a R11: 000000007fffffff R12: ffffc900010d7940 R13: ffff888368d8f980 R14: ffffc900010d7a48 R15: ffffc900010d78d0 FS: 00007f445c5ce680(0000) GS:ffff8884a97ea000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 CR2: 00007f443803b9a8 CR3: 0000000107a4b000 CR4: 00000000003506f0 Call Trace: <TASK> xfs_da_grow_inode_int+0x2e0/0x300 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xfs_dir2_grow_inode+0x6e/0x150 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xfs_dir2_sf_to_block+0x149/0x870 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xrep_dir_swap_prep+0xe2/0x110 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xrep_dir_swap+0xfb/0x2f0 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xrep_dir_rebuild_tree+0x99/0x100 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xrep_directory+0x83/0x1c0 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xrep_attempt+0x4f/0x1e0 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xfs_scrub_metadata+0x393/0x5b0 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xfs_ioc_scrubv_metadata+0x306/0x570 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] xfs_file_ioctl+0xa4f/0x1150 [xfs 5de2257e14108c136f11317e6bbb8ac77efd392c] __x64_sys_ioctl+0x76/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x7a/0x3b0 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53 This is a consequence of commit 0fe77e57588b98, which added the following assertion to xfs_da_grow_inode_int: ASSERT(args->total >= dp->i_nblocks - nblks); Tracing this back to xrep_dir_swap_prep, I noticed that the xfs_da_args object that's passed to xfs_dir2_sf_to_block sets args->total to 1. This is incorrect because mkfs set the directory block size to 8k and the filesystem block size to 4k. In other words, args->total should be 2 here, not 1. Dave Chinner tripped over the same problem with the same branch through a different channel -- his test setup set the fs block size to 1k, in which case the directory block size is still set to 4k. Here, args->total should be 4. Changing the assignment of args->total to sc->mp->m_dir_geo->fsbcount makes the assertion go away, but that isn't a complete fix. In xrep_tempexch_estimate, we also incorrectly assume that a shortform conversion requires 1 fsblock when it should be m_dir_geo->fsbcount. Without that, we can under-reserve space in the transaction and cause a filesystem shutdown. Note that the xfs_dabuf_nfsb helper will compute the correct value for directories and xattr, so we use that instead of open-coding the logic. Also fix xrep_xattr_swap_prep to assign args->total via xfs_dabuf_nfsb to avoid one logic bomb if we ever support multi-fsblock attrs. Tripped-by: 0fe77e57588b98 ("xfs: assert the reservation covers each da fork growth")

The advisory is shared at git.kernel.org. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2026-97549 since 09/24/2026. The exploitation appears to be easy. An attack has to be approached locally. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Technical details are known, but no exploit is available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 09/25/2026).

Upgrading to version 7.2.7 or 7.3-rc3 eliminates this vulnerability. Applying the patch b950e84acd072ac648ace4fea53c0b1212da4b2c/4d3c07591534517c633945c8d8e6526f10e3fabc is able to eliminate this problem. The best possible mitigation is suggested to be upgrading to the latest version.

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Productinfo

Type

Vendor

Name

Version

License

Website

CPE 2.3info

CPE 2.2info

CVSSv4info

VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv3info

VulDB Meta Base Score: 3.9
VulDB Meta Temp Score: 3.8

VulDB Base Score: 3.9
VulDB Temp Score: 3.8
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

CVSSv2info

AVACAuCIA
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
💳💳💳💳💳💳
VectorComplexityAuthenticationConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
UnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍

Exploitinginfo

Class: Assertion
CWE: CWE-617
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒

Physical: Partially
Local: Yes
Remote: Partially

Availability: 🔒
Status: Not defined
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔒

0-DayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock
TodayUnlockUnlockUnlockUnlock

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Interest: 🔍
Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍

Countermeasuresinfo

Recommended: Upgrade
Status: 🔍

0-Day Time: 🔒

Upgrade: Kernel 7.2.7/7.3-rc3
Patch: b950e84acd072ac648ace4fea53c0b1212da4b2c/4d3c07591534517c633945c8d8e6526f10e3fabc

Timelineinfo

09/24/2026 CVE reserved
09/25/2026 +1 days Advisory disclosed
09/25/2026 +0 days VulDB entry created
09/25/2026 +0 days VulDB entry last update

Sourcesinfo

Vendor: kernel.org

Advisory: git.kernel.org
Status: Confirmed

CVE: CVE-2026-97549 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2026-97549
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-410005

Entryinfo

Created: 09/25/2026 13:45
Changes: 09/25/2026 13:45 (61)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103

If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.

Discussion

No comments yet. Languages: en.

Please log in to comment.

Are you interested in using VulDB?

Download the whitepaper to learn more about our service!