Re: [PATCH] docs: proc: document ProtectionKey in smaps

[David Hildenbrand (Arm)]

On 4/8/26 09:15, Kevin Brodsky wrote:
> On 08/04/2026 09:05, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>>> I think that "system" is too nebulous there, so I would prefer to see
>>> "hardware" instead.
>> What if you're running in a VM where the feature is hidden ... ?
> 
> Of course that's also possible, "hardware" has to be interpreted in the
> context of virtualisation... But granted it is possible to hide features
> even on the host with the right kernel parameter, on arm64 at least.
> 
> "If the kernel supports protection keys (pkeys) and the hardware feature
> is detected"? Still vague but a little more accurate.

Can we just talk about CPU support, to avoid using "system" or "hardware" ?

-- 
Cheers,

David