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=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 73925C4332B for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from silver.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) (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 416492080C for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:16 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 416492080C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.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 silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17033204F5; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from silver.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1GRiYc9aZMFi; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [140.211.9.56]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE7CF203AF; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A71C18DA; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28A20C07FF for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 203B786D5C for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:13 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qK95V0vF4JYO for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFB0D86D76 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 17:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jEyvW-0006QR-UH; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:25:51 +0100 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E6E1F103088; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:25:49 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Borislav Petkov , Robin Murphy Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] treewide: Rename "unencrypted" to "decrypted" In-Reply-To: <20200319112054.GD13073@zn.tnic> 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> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:25:49 +0100 Message-ID: <878sjw5k9u.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1, SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , Vasily Gorbik , Tom Lendacky , Peter Zijlstra , Michael Ellerman , x86@kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , lkml , Christian Borntraeger , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar , Paul Mackerras , Andy Lutomirski , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, 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" 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. >> >> 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); TBH, I don't see how if (force_dma_decrypted(dev)) set_memory_encrypted((unsigned long)cpu_addr, 1 << page_order); makes more sense than the above. It's both non-sensical unless there is a big fat comment explaining what this is about. Thanks, tglx _______________________________________________ iommu mailing list iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu