On 3/17/20 2:06 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 01:35:12PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: >> On 3/17/20 4:18 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >>> Back then when the whole SME machinery started getting mainlined, it >>> was agreed that for simplicity, clarity and sanity's sake, the terms >>> denoting encrypted and not-encrypted memory should be "encrypted" and >>> "decrypted". And the majority of the code sticks to that convention >>> except those two. So rename them. >> Don't "unencrypted" and "decrypted" mean different things? >> >> Unencrypted to me means "encryption was never used for this data". >> >> Decrypted means "this was/is encrypted but here is a plaintext copy". > Maybe but linguistical semantics is not the point here. > > The idea is to represent a "binary" concept of memory being encrypted > or memory being not encrypted. And at the time we decided to use > "encrypted" and "decrypted" for those two things. Yeah, agreed. We're basically trying to name "!encrypted". > Do you see the need to differentiate a third "state", so to speak, of > memory which was never encrypted? No, there are just two states. I just think the "!encrypted" case should not be called "decrypted".
