Re: The current status of PKS virtualization

[Ruihan Li]

On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 01:40:08PM +0800, Chenyi Qiang wrote:
> Lei has left Intel so the mail address in unreachable.
> 
> And as you found, we dropped the PKS KVM upstream along with the base PKS support
> due to no valid use case in Linux. You can feel free to continue the upstream work.

Thanks for the reply and for the information!

By the way, I'm just curious (feel free to ignore this question): Is
there an on-list discussion that rejects the originally proposed PKS use
cases?

I found that pmem stray write protection was rejected [1], but there is
no reason given nor any reference provided. After searching the list, I
found the latest patch series that attempts to add pmem stray protection
[2]. However, I didn't find any discussion rejecting the use case. Maybe
the discussion happened off the list? Or did I miss something?

 [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3b3c941f1fb69d67706457a30cecc96bfde57353.camel@xxxxxxxxx/
 [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220419170649.1022246-1-ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx/

> But I'm not sure if your use case is compelling enough to be accepted by maintainers.

Yeah, I have the same concern. So, I asked about the current status
first. So far, Paolo's reply seems positive, so maybe I can try it out
if I can find enough time.

Thanks,
Ruihan Li