lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/mm: add .data..decrypted section to hold shared variables
    dropping stable@

    On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:33:24AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote:
    > During the initial SEV/SME patch review cycle we had some discussion about
    > using decrypted vs unencrypted. At that time the consensus was
    > that a memory range mapped with C=0 should be referred as 'decrypted'.

    Yes, the idea was to avoid having "unencrypted" *and* "decrypted" to
    mean pretty much the same thing for ease of understanding just by
    looking at the name.

    Also whether the data was initially unencrypted or was decrypted is
    immaterial - you only need to know how to access it.

    > Having said so, I do see your point and I am not oppose to calling it
    > 'unencrypted' if others agrees to it.

    No, please don't. Let's stick with "decrypted" for everything.

    --
    Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

    SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
    --

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2018-08-30 11:27    [W:2.413 / U:0.700 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site