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 60539C4332B for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:08:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (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 CAF33206D7 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:08:46 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CAF33206D7 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48jkg00nN4zDr43 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:08:44 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=arm.com (client-ip=217.140.110.172; helo=foss.arm.com; envelope-from=robin.murphy@arm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48jkcb4zlRzDr8q for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 22:06:34 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4BB731B; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 04:06:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.123] (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2A993F305; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 04:06:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] treewide: Rename "unencrypted" to "decrypted" To: Borislav Petkov , Christoph Hellwig References: <20200317111822.GA15609@zn.tnic> <20200319101657.GB13073@zn.tnic> <20200319102011.GA3617@lst.de> <20200319102834.GC13073@zn.tnic> From: Robin Murphy Message-ID: <8d6d3b6c-7e4e-7d9e-3e19-38f7d4477c72@arm.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:06:15 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200319102834.GC13073@zn.tnic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: 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 , Thomas Gleixner , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Marek Szyprowski Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" [since this is in my inbox...] On 2020-03-19 10:28 am, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 11:20:11AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> I thought we agreed that decrypted is absolutely the wrong term. > > I don't think we did. At least I don't know where we did that. > >> So NAK - if you want to change things it needs to go the other way. > > We are already using "decrypted" everywhere in arch/x86/. Changing that > would be a *lot* more churn. > > And it is just a term, for chrissakes, to denote memory which is not > encrypted. And it would make our lifes easier if we had only *two* terms > instead of three or more. Especially if the concept we denote with this > is a binary one: encrypted memory and *not* encrypted memory. 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. Robin.