# CVE-2024-40950: mm: huge_memory: fix misused mapping_large_folio_support() for anon folios

> A missing check in the Linux kernel memory management code causes failures when splitting anonymous huge pages, potentially leading to system instability or denial of service.

- **Severity:** Medium 5.5 (`CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H`)
- **Exploited in the wild:** Not known
- **Login needed:** Any signed-in user
- **Attackable:** Local or same network only
- **Victim action needed:** Not needed
- **Fix available:** Yes
- **Published:** 12 Jul 2024
- **Updated:** 11 May 2026
- **Also known as:** BELL-CVE-2024-40950, DEBIAN-CVE-2024-40950, GHSA-qvp3-ffc6-xf43, UBUNTU-CVE-2024-40950

## What is CVE-2024-40950?

CVE-2024-40950 is a medium-severity denial of service vulnerability in Linux kernel, published on 12 Jul 2024. It can only be exploited from the same machine or local network, with no action from the victim.

### Official description

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

mm: huge_memory: fix misused mapping_large_folio_support() for anon folios

When I did a large folios split test, a WARNING "[ 5059.122759][ T166]
Cannot split file folio to non-0 order" was triggered.  But the test cases
are only for anonmous folios.  while mapping_large_folio_support() is only
reasonable for page cache folios.

In split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(), the folio passed to
mapping_large_folio_support() maybe anonmous folio.  The folio_test_anon()
check is missing.  So the split of the anonmous THP is failed.  This is
also the same for shmem_mapping().  We'd better add a check for both.  But
the shmem_mapping() in __split_huge_page() is not involved, as for
anonmous folios, the end parameter is set to -1, so (head[i].index >= end)
is always false.  shmem_mapping() is not called.

Also add a VM_WARN_ON_ONCE() in mapping_large_folio_support() for anon
mapping, So we can detect the wrong use more easily.

THP folios maybe exist in the pagecache even the file system doesn't
support large folio, it is because when CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE is
enabled, khugepaged will try to collapse read-only file-backed pages to
THP.  But the mapping does not actually support multi order large folios
properly.

Using /sys/kernel/debug/split_huge_pages to verify this, with this patch,
large anon THP is successfully split and the warning is ceased.

## Which versions are affected by CVE-2024-40950?

It affects 1 product.


Products: Linux kernel.

## How do I fix CVE-2024-40950?

Apply the vendor's patch.

## Is CVE-2024-40950 being exploited?

There is no known exploitation of CVE-2024-40950 in the wild and no public exploit code.

## Other vulnerabilities in Linux kernel

- [CVE-2026-53266](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-53266/): Linux Kernel Out-of-Bounds Write (high 8.8, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2013-6282](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2013-6282/): Linux Kernel Improper Input Validation (high 8.8, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2022-0185](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2022-0185/): Linux Kernel Heap-Based Buffer Overflow (high 8.4, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2013-2094](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2013-2094/): Linux Kernel Privilege Escalation (high 8.4, exploited in the wild)
- [CVE-2026-53362](https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2026-53362/): Linux Kernel Unspecified (high 7.8, exploited in the wild)

## Fix prompt for AI coding agents

```text
Check this codebase for CVE-2024-40950 and fix it if it is affected.

What it is: CVE-2024-40950 is a medium-severity denial of service vulnerability in Linux kernel, published on 12 Jul 2024. It can only be exploited from the same machine or local network, with no action from the victim.
Exploitation: There is no known exploitation of CVE-2024-40950 in the wild and no public exploit code.

Affected product: Linux kernel. No package-level version data is available, so check the vendor advisory linked from the reference page.

Task:
1. Search the dependency manifests and lockfiles (for example package.json, package-lock.json, requirements.txt, poetry.lock, uv.lock, pom.xml, build.gradle, go.mod, Cargo.lock, Gemfile.lock) and any Dockerfiles for the affected packages, including transitive dependencies.
2. If an affected version is in use, upgrade it to the fixed version for its release line with the project's package manager, so the lockfile is regenerated. Prefer the smallest upgrade that fixes it.
3. If there is no fix, or the upgrade would break the build, do not guess: explain the risk and the safest workaround instead.
4. Run the tests and summarise what changed and why.
5. If nothing in the project is affected, say so and change nothing.

Reference: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2024-40950/ (Markdown: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2024-40950/index.md)
```

## Sources

- CVE record: https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2024-40950
- NVD: https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-40950
- OSV: https://osv.dev/vulnerability/CVE-2024-40950

---
From sbomify Insights: https://insights.sbomify.com/CVE-2024-40950/
Summaries are generated and may contain mistakes; the official description above is the record.