Messages in this thread | | | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -v2] treewide: Rename "unencrypted" to "decrypted" | Date | Fri, 20 Mar 2020 00:53:49 +0100 |
| |
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> writes: > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 06:25:49PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> 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 > > 9087c37584fb ("dma-direct: Force unencrypted DMA under SME for certain DMA masks")
Reading the changelog again...
I have to say that force_dma_unencrypted() makes way more sense in that context than force_dma_decrypted(). It still wants a comment.
Linguistical semantics and correctness matters a lot. Consistency is required as well, but not for the price of ambiguous wording.
Thanks,
tglx
| |