Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 13 Jul 2018 15:33:58 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc:     Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>,
        Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
        "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromiun.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
        Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 25/27] x86/cet: Add PTRACE interface for CET
Message-ID: <20180713133357.GB13602@gmail.com>
References: <20180710222639.8241-1-yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
 <20180710222639.8241-26-yu-cheng.yu@intel.com>
 <20180711102035.GB8574@gmail.com>
 <1531323638.13297.24.camel@intel.com>
 <20180712140327.GA7810@gmail.com>
 <20180713062804.GA6905@amd>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180713062804.GA6905@amd>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


* Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:

> 
> > > > to "CET" (which is a well-known acronym for "Central European Time"),
> > > > not to CFE?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I don't know if I can change that, will find out.
> > 
> > So what I'd suggest is something pretty simple: to use CFT/cft in kernel internal 
> > names, except for the Intel feature bit and any MSR enumeration which can be CET 
> > if Intel named it that way, and a short comment explaining the acronym difference.
> > 
> > Or something like that.
> 
> Actually, I don't think CFT is much better -- there's limited number
> of TLAs (*). "ENFORCE_FLOW"? "FLOWE"? "EFLOW"?

Erm, I wanted to say 'CFE', i.e. the abbreviation of 'Control Flow Enforcement'.

But I guess I can live with CET as well ...

Thanks,

	Ingo