Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] x86/mm: add .data..decrypted section to hold shared variables

[Borislav Petkov]

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 ImendÃrffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG NÃrnberg)
--