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 E00D2C4332D for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E5D2076E for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:00:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727383AbgCSWAA (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:00:00 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:41578 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727257AbgCSWAA (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 18:00:00 -0400 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 Cc: Borislav Petkov , Robin Murphy , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen , Vasily Gorbik , Tom Lendacky , Peter Zijlstra , x86@kernel.org, Heiko Carstens , lkml , Christian Borntraeger , iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar , Paul Mackerras , Andy Lutomirski , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Christoph Hellwig , Marek Szyprowski 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-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <878sjw5k9u.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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