CVE-2025-21860

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/zswap: fix inconsistency when zswap_store_page() fails Commit b7c0ccdfbafd ("mm: zswap: support large folios in zswap_store()") skips charging any zswap entries when it failed to zswap the entire folio. However, when some base pages are zswapped but it failed to zswap the entire folio, the zswap operation is rolled back. When freeing zswap entries for those pages, zswap_entry_free() uncharges the zswap entries that were not previously charged, causing zswap charging to become inconsistent. This inconsistency triggers two warnings with following steps: # On a machine with 64GiB of RAM and 36GiB of zswap $ stress-ng --bigheap 2 # wait until the OOM-killer kills stress-ng $ sudo reboot The two warnings are: in mm/memcontrol.c:163, function obj_cgroup_release(): WARN_ON_ONCE(nr_bytes & (PAGE_SIZE - 1)); in mm/page_counter.c:60, function page_counter_cancel(): if (WARN_ONCE(new < 0, "page_counter underflow: %ld nr_pages=%lu\n", new, nr_pages)) zswap_stored_pages also becomes inconsistent in the same way. As suggested by Kanchana, increment zswap_stored_pages and charge zswap entries within zswap_store_page() when it succeeds. This way, zswap_entry_free() will decrement the counter and uncharge the entries when it failed to zswap the entire folio. While this could potentially be optimized by batching objcg charging and incrementing the counter, let's focus on fixing the bug this time and leave the optimization for later after some evaluation. After resolving the inconsistency, the warnings disappear. [[email protected]: refactor zswap_store_page()]

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. Limited direct impact.

Exploit odds

0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

1. 2025-03-12 10:15 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-06-17 08:44 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.2% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 3.3 LOW (CVSS).
• Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.

Details

Published

2025-03-12 10:15 UTC

Last modified

2026-06-17 08:44 UTC

Exploit probability

0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days

Record status

Modified

Affected

• Linux Kernel < 6.13.5
• Linux Kernel 6.14

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 3.3

Attack vector

Local

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

Low

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

None

Availability

Low

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2025-21860.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2025-21860. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge