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;
Date:   Mon, 6 Jul 2020 18:10:52 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        tech-board-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
        Chris Mason <clm@fb.clm>, torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Tech-board-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology
Message-ID: <20200706181052.174c290a@oasis.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <1cceba0f-c8ad-260d-9a09-5417bee32d50@gmail.com>
References: <159389297140.2210796.13590142254668787525.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com>
        <1cceba0f-c8ad-260d-9a09-5417bee32d50@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 00:31:49 +0300
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
> > index 2657a55c6f12..4b15ab671089 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
> > @@ -319,6 +319,18 @@ If you are afraid to mix up your local variable names, you have another
> >  problem, which is called the function-growth-hormone-imbalance syndrome.
> >  See chapter 6 (Functions).
> >  
> > +For symbol names, avoid introducing new usage of the words 'slave' and
> > +'blacklist'. Recommended replacements for 'slave' are: 'secondary',
> > +'subordinate', 'replica', 'responder', 'follower', 'proxy', or
> > +'performer'.  Recommended replacements for blacklist are: 'blocklist' or
> > +'denylist'.  
> 
> "Subordinate" means that they are unequal, and inequality is a big issue. This

And if two objects are unequal, then that seems to be an appropriate
term. We are not concerned about the inequality of devices.

-- Steve