On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 01:09:55PM -0700, Rajat Jain wrote: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 4:12 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 10:02 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 11:29:05PM -0700, Rajat Jain wrote: > > > > Rename the field to make it more clear, that the device can execute DMA > > > > attacks on the system, and thus the system may need protection from > > > > such attacks from this device. > > > > > > > > No functional change intended. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rajat Jain <rajatja@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > v4: Initial version, created based on comments on other patch > > > > > > What a horrible name. Why not untrusted_dma which captures the > > > intent much better? > > > > FWIW, I like this one much better too. > > Sure, no problems. I can change the name to "untrusted_dma". > > Mika, can I carry forward your "Reviewed-by" tag with this name change too? Sure :)
