Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: eY2Jj1ZXc3WgwmUwEM0TwHHQ+GY3nelbGck1Src2rkAhDZNFFWFtzZm5uapTxfz1JC9BpKRPVb
 cqS8L2cHzRGA==
From:   SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
CC:     SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        <apw@canonical.com>, SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>,
        <colin.king@canonical.com>, <sj38.park@gmail.com>,
        <jslaby@suse.cz>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Recommend denylist/allowlist instead of blacklist/whitelist
Date:   Thu, 11 Jun 2020 09:38:04 +0200
Message-ID: <20200611073804.10225-1-sjpark@amazon.com>
In-Reply-To: <d323a6a114690e4757c777befc997d60d82558f2.camel@perches.com> (raw)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:35:24 -0700 Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 08:25 +0200, SeongJae Park wrote:
> > From: SeongJae Park <sjpark@amazon.de>
> > 
> > This patchset 1) adds support of deprecated terms in the 'checkpatch.pl'
> > and 2) set the 'blacklist' and 'whitelist' as deprecated with
> > replacement suggestion of 'denylist' and 'allowlist', because the
> > suggestions are incontrovertible, doesn't make people hurt, and more
> > self-explanatory.
> 
> While the checkpatch implementation is better,
> I'm still very "meh" about the whole concept.

I can understand your concerns about politic things in the second patch.
However, the concept of the 'deprecated terms' in the first patch is not
political but applicable to the general cases.  We already had the commits[1]
for a similar case.  So, could you ack for at least the first patch?

[1] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-Kernel-Hugs


Thanks,
SeongJae Park