On Wed, 2020-07-08 at 00:23 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Linux maintains a coding-style and its own idiomatic set of terminology.
> Update the style guidelines to recommend replacements for the terms
> master/slave and blacklist/whitelist.
>
> Link:
> http://lore.kernel.org/r/159389297140.2210796.13590142254668787525.st...@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com
> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Dave Airlie <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
> Acked-by: SeongJae Park <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Olof Johansson <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <[email protected]>
> ---
> Changes since v1 [1]
> - Drop inclusive-terminology.rst, it is in the lore archives if the
> arguments are needed for future debates, but otherwise no pressing
> need to carry it in the tree (Linus, James)
Where did Linus publicly state this was unnecessary?
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
> b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
[]
> @@ -319,6 +319,19 @@ 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 'master/slave' (or
> +'slave' independent of 'master') and 'blacklist/whitelist'. Recommended
> +replacements for 'master/slave' are: 'main/{secondary,subordinate}',
> +'primary/replica', '{initiator,requester}/{target,responder}',
> +'host/{device,proxy}', or 'leader/{performer,follower}'. Recommended
> +replacements for 'blacklist/whitelist' are: 'denylist/allowlist' or
> +'blocklist/passlist'.
Adding a reference to SeongJae Park's introduction of
scripts/deprecated_terms.txt or the like might help
make this list unnecessary if more terms are added.
> +Exceptions for introducing new usage is to maintain a userspace ABI/API,
> +or when updating code for an existing (as of 2020) hardware or protocol
> +specification that mandates those terms. For new specifications
> +translate specification usage of the terminology to the kernel coding
> +standard where possible.
I believe any existing code should not be changed,
not just code that is required to be maintained
for userspace.
