Re: [Tech-board-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology

[Pavel Begunkov]

On 07/07/2020 01:10, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 00:31:49 +0300
> Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx> 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.

Totally agree with you! But do we care then whether two _devices_ or _objects_
are slave-master? Can't see how it fundamentally differs.

-- 
Pavel Begunkov