CVE-2026-31648: mm: filemap: fix nr_pages calculation overflow in filemap_map_pages()

Vulnerability summary

CVE-2026-31648 is a high (CVSS 7.8) Integer Overflow or Wraparound vulnerability in linux. EPSS estimates a 0.12% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 1.8% of scored vulnerabilities.

Timeline

1. 24-04-2026
   PublishedVulnerability first disclosed.
2. 19-10-2026
   Last modifiedVulnerability information updated.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm: filemap: fix nr_pages calculation overflow in filemap_map_pages() When running stress-ng on my Arm64 machine with v7.0-rc3 kernel, I encountered some very strange crash issues showing up as "Bad page state": " [ 734.496287] BUG: Bad page state in process stress-ng-env pfn:415735fb [ 734.496427] page: refcount:0 mapcount:1 mapping:0000000000000000 index:0x4cf316 pfn:0x415735fb [ 734.496434] flags: 0x57fffe000000800(owner_2|node=1|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x3ffff) [ 734.496439] raw: 057fffe000000800 0000000000000000 dead000000000122 0000000000000000 [ 734.496440] raw: 00000000004cf316 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 [ 734.496442] page dumped because: nonzero mapcount " After analyzing this page’s state, it is hard to understand why the mapcount is not 0 while the refcount is 0, since this page is not where the issue first occurred. By enabling the CONFIG_DEBUG_VM config, I can reproduce the crash as well and captured the first warning where the issue appears: " [ 734.469226] page: refcount:33 mapcount:0 mapping:00000000bef2d187 index:0x81a0 pfn:0x415735c0 [ 734.469304] head: order:5 mapcount:0 entire_mapcount:0 nr_pages_mapped:0 pincount:0 [ 734.469315] memcg:ffff000807a8ec00 [ 734.469320] aops:ext4_da_aops ino:100b6f dentry name(?):"stress-ng-mmaptorture-9397-0-2736200540" [ 734.469335] flags: 0x57fffe400000069(locked|uptodate|lru|head|node=1|zone=2|lastcpupid=0x3ffff) ...... [ 734.469364] page dumped because: VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO((_Generic((page + nr_pages - 1), const struct page *: (const struct folio *)_compound_head(page + nr_pages - 1), struct page *: (struct folio *)_compound_head(page + nr_pages - 1))) != folio) [ 734.469390] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 734.469393] WARNING: ./include/linux/rmap.h:351 at folio_add_file_rmap_ptes+0x3b8/0x468, CPU#90: stress-ng-mlock/9430 [ 734.469551] folio_add_file_rmap_ptes+0x3b8/0x468 (P) [ 734.469555] set_pte_range+0xd8/0x2f8 [ 734.469566] filemap_map_folio_range+0x190/0x400 [ 734.469579] filemap_map_pages+0x348/0x638 [ 734.469583] do_fault_around+0x140/0x198 ...... [ 734.469640] el0t_64_sync+0x184/0x188 " The code that triggers the warning is: "VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(page_folio(page + nr_pages - 1) != folio, folio)", which indicates that set_pte_range() tried to map beyond the large folio’s size. By adding more debug information, I found that 'nr_pages' had overflowed in filemap_map_pages(), causing set_pte_range() to establish mappings for a range exceeding the folio size, potentially corrupting fields of pages that do not belong to this folio (e.g., page->_mapcount). After above analysis, I think the possible race is as follows: CPU 0 CPU 1 filemap_map_pages() ext4_setattr() //get and lock folio with old inode->i_size next_uptodate_folio() ....... //shrink the inode->i_size i_size_write(inode, attr->ia_size); //calculate the end_pgoff with the new inode->i_size file_end = DIV_ROUND_UP(i_size_read(mapping->host), PAGE_SIZE) - 1; end_pgoff = min(end_pgoff, file_end); ...... //nr_pages can be overflowed, cause xas.xa_index > end_pgoff end = folio_next_index(folio) - 1; nr_pages = min(end, end_pgoff) - xas.xa_index + 1; ...... //map large folio filemap_map_folio_range() ...... //truncate folios truncate_pagecache(inode, inode->i_size); To fix this issue, move the 'end_pgoff' calculation before next_uptodate_folio(), so the retrieved folio stays consistent with the file end to avoid ---truncated---

• CWE-190Integer Overflow or WraparoundThe product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.