GHSA-6FHQ-5HRR-WQ44
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-03 18:31 – Updated: 2026-04-03 18:31In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mm/huge_memory: fix use of NULL folio in move_pages_huge_pmd()
move_pages_huge_pmd() handles UFFDIO_MOVE for both normal THPs and huge zero pages. For the huge zero page path, src_folio is explicitly set to NULL, and is used as a sentinel to skip folio operations like lock and rmap.
In the huge zero page branch, src_folio is NULL, so folio_mk_pmd(NULL, pgprot) passes NULL through folio_pfn() and page_to_pfn(). With SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP this silently produces a bogus PFN, installing a PMD pointing to non-existent physical memory. On other memory models it is a NULL dereference.
Use page_folio(src_page) to obtain the valid huge zero folio from the page, which was obtained from pmd_page() and remains valid throughout.
After commit d82d09e48219 ("mm/huge_memory: mark PMD mappings of the huge zero folio special"), moved huge zero PMDs must remain special so vm_normal_page_pmd() continues to treat them as special mappings.
move_pages_huge_pmd() currently reconstructs the destination PMD in the huge zero page branch, which drops PMD state such as pmd_special() on architectures with CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL. As a result, vm_normal_page_pmd() can treat the moved huge zero PMD as a normal page and corrupt its refcount.
Instead of reconstructing the PMD from the folio, derive the destination entry from src_pmdval after pmdp_huge_clear_flush(), then handle the PMD metadata the same way move_huge_pmd() does for moved entries by marking it soft-dirty and clearing uffd-wp.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-31397"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-03T16:16:38Z",
"severity": null
},
"details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nmm/huge_memory: fix use of NULL folio in move_pages_huge_pmd()\n\nmove_pages_huge_pmd() handles UFFDIO_MOVE for both normal THPs and huge\nzero pages. For the huge zero page path, src_folio is explicitly set to\nNULL, and is used as a sentinel to skip folio operations like lock and\nrmap.\n\nIn the huge zero page branch, src_folio is NULL, so folio_mk_pmd(NULL,\npgprot) passes NULL through folio_pfn() and page_to_pfn(). With\nSPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP this silently produces a bogus PFN, installing a PMD\npointing to non-existent physical memory. On other memory models it is a\nNULL dereference.\n\nUse page_folio(src_page) to obtain the valid huge zero folio from the\npage, which was obtained from pmd_page() and remains valid throughout.\n\nAfter commit d82d09e48219 (\"mm/huge_memory: mark PMD mappings of the huge\nzero folio special\"), moved huge zero PMDs must remain special so\nvm_normal_page_pmd() continues to treat them as special mappings.\n\nmove_pages_huge_pmd() currently reconstructs the destination PMD in the\nhuge zero page branch, which drops PMD state such as pmd_special() on\narchitectures with CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PTE_SPECIAL. As a result,\nvm_normal_page_pmd() can treat the moved huge zero PMD as a normal page\nand corrupt its refcount.\n\nInstead of reconstructing the PMD from the folio, derive the destination\nentry from src_pmdval after pmdp_huge_clear_flush(), then handle the PMD\nmetadata the same way move_huge_pmd() does for moved entries by marking it\nsoft-dirty and clearing uffd-wp.",
"id": "GHSA-6fhq-5hrr-wq44",
"modified": "2026-04-03T18:31:23Z",
"published": "2026-04-03T18:31:23Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-31397"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e3133d0986dc5a231d5419167dbac65312b28b41"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f3caaee0f9e489fd2282d4ce45791dc8aed2da62"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/fae654083bfa409bb2244f390232e2be47f05bfc"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.