Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] docs: i2c: summary: document 'local' and 'remote' targets

[Wolfram Sang]

Hi Andi

> > Have you read the paragraph "Synonyms" from patch 6? I don't think we
> > can obsolete client because:
> > 
> > $ git grep 'struct i2c_client \*client' | wc -l
> > 6100
> 
> yes, I know, but I would be happy if we start changing i2c_client
> with i2c_target and at least saying that "target" is the
> preferred name for what was called "client" until now.

This is largely what patch 6 does? Let me quote:

+As mentioned above, the Linux I2C implementation historically uses the terms                                                                                                                     │
+"adapter" for controller and "client" for target. A number of data structures                                                                                                                    │
+have these synonyms in their name. So, to discuss implementation details, it                                                                                                                     │
+might be easier to use these terms. If speaking about I2C in general, the                                                                                                                        │
+official terminology is preferred.                                                                                                                                                               │

> I think we should start somewhere from using the new naming
> provided by the documentation.

I think I can justify replacing "master/slave" and create quite some
churn because that terminology is unwanted language.

I think I cannot justify replacing "adapter/client" just because it
doesn't match the spec. Plus, the churn would be a lot bigger.

If everyone (especially affected subsystem maintainers) is like "Yeah,
do it!" I can do it. But I have my doubts...

Happy hacking,

   Wolfram

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature