From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3882C4332B for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C466620772 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:04 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C466620772 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C116885D9; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qZVopalDukDC; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [140.211.9.56]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D0C187BC8; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 378DAC18DA; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838C8C07FF for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65F5D8806D for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WSCo+Z2BvI0t for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9614187E3C for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59322ADAD; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 21:59:57 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:59:55 +0100 From: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Such=E1nek?= To: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] treewide: Rename "unencrypted" to "decrypted" Message-ID: <20200319215955.GN25468@kitsune.suse.cz> References: <20200317111822.GA15609@zn.tnic> <20200319101657.GB13073@zn.tnic> <20200319102011.GA3617@lst.de> <20200319102834.GC13073@zn.tnic> <8d6d3b6c-7e4e-7d9e-3e19-38f7d4477c72@arm.com> <20200319112054.GD13073@zn.tnic> <878sjw5k9u.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <878sjw5k9u.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: Tom Lendacky , x86@kernel.org, Vasily Gorbik , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Dave Hansen , Heiko Carstens , lkml , Christian Borntraeger , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , Paul Mackerras , Robin Murphy , Christoph Hellwig X-BeenThere: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues for Linux IOMMU support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: iommu-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Sender: "iommu" On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 06:25:49PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Borislav Petkov writes: > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 11:06:15AM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > >> Let me add another vote from a native English speaker that "unencrypted" is > >> the appropriate term to imply the *absence* of encryption, whereas > >> "decrypted" implies the *reversal* of applied encryption. Even as a non-native speaker I can clearly see the distinction. > >> > >> Naming things is famously hard, for good reason - names are *important* for > >> understanding. Just because a decision was already made one way doesn't mean > >> that that decision was necessarily right. Churning one area to be > >> consistently inaccurate just because it's less work than churning another > >> area to be consistently accurate isn't really the best excuse. > > > > Well, the reason we chose "decrypted" vs something else is so to be as > > different from "encrypted" as possible. If we called it "unencrypted" > > you'd have stuff like: > > > > if (force_dma_unencrypted(dev)) > > set_memory_encrypted((unsigned long)cpu_addr, 1 << page_order); If you want something with high edit distance from 'encrypted' meaning the opposite there is already 'cleartext' which was designed for this exact purpose. Thanks Michal _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu