Re: [LPC] pkeys ABI

On 17/06/2026 15:06, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 6/17/26 14:57, Kevin Brodsky wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am considering submitting a Refereed presentation proposal for LPC,
>> but I would first like to check if it makes sense to everyone in To/Cc.
>>
>> The pkeys ABI is heavily underspecified when it comes to asynchronous
>> kernel interactions, such as signal delivery [1], rseq [2], io_uring
>> worker threads, etc. Depending on the situation, we might reset the pkey
>> register to "allow all", or "allow acess to pkey 0 only", or use the
>> interrupted context's register (even though it is arguably unrelated).
>> It isn't always consistent across architectures either. 
>>
>> As Thomas put it, "that's all broken". LPC feels like the right occasion
>> to summarise where we are, and explore potential solutions.
>> Unfortunately this topic isn't an obvious fit for any MC, so a Refereed
>> presentation seems like the least bad option.
> What about the Kernel Summit "[TECH TOPIC]" track? see
> https://lpc.events/event/20/abstracts/
>
> Seems like this would fit perfectly.

That was my initial idea, but I'm not sure whether this topic is broad
enough for a Kernel Summit slot. If people think that's the case I'm
more than happy to make a submission on the Kernel Summit track.

Maybe a BoF is really the right format, as James suggested.

- Kevin