Re: [RFC PATCH 28/56] stop_machine: Add stop_machine_nmi()
From: Chang S. Bae
Date: Fri Jan 09 2026 - 17:16:06 EST
On 10/13/2025 7:34 AM, David Kaplan wrote:
+/**
+ * stop_machine_nmi: freeze the machine and run this function in NMI context
+ * @fn: the function to run
+ * @data: the data ptr for the @fn()
+ * @cpus: the cpus to run the @fn() on (NULL = any online cpu)
+ *
+ * Like stop_machine() but runs the function in NMI context to avoid any risk of
+ * interruption due to NMIs.
+ *
+ * Protects against CPU hotplug.
+ */
+int stop_machine_nmi(cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *data, const struct cpumask *cpus);
+
+/**
+ * stop_machine_cpuslocked_nmi: freeze and run this function in NMI context
+ * @fn: the function to run
+ * @data: the data ptr for the @fn()
+ * @cpus: the cpus to run the @fn() on (NULL = any online cpu)
+ *
+ * Same as above. Must be called from within a cpus_read_lock() protected
+ * region. Avoids nested calls to cpus_read_lock().
+ */
+int stop_machine_cpuslocked_nmi(cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *data, const struct cpumask *cpus);
<snip>
+int stop_machine_cpuslocked_nmi(cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *data,
+ const struct cpumask *cpus)
+{
+ return __stop_machine_cpuslocked(fn, data, cpus, true);
+}
+
It looks like this is readily missing the static key switching which is handled below. I think the body could be something like:
...
static_branch_enable_cpuslocked(&stop_machine_nmi_handler_enable);
ret = __stop_machine_cpuslocked(fn, data, cpus, true);
static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(&stop_machine_nmi_handler_enable);
...
+int stop_machine_nmi(cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *data, const struct cpumask *cpus)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ cpus_read_lock();
+ static_branch_enable_cpuslocked(&stop_machine_nmi_handler_enable);
+ ret = stop_machine_cpuslocked_nmi(fn, data, cpus);
+ static_branch_disable_cpuslocked(&stop_machine_nmi_handler_enable);
+ cpus_read_unlock();
+ return ret;
+}
With that, here __stop_machine_cpuslocked() can be invoked instead.
Thanks,
Chang