On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 11:56 PM SeongJae Park <sjp...@amazon.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > On Sat, 04 Jul 2020 13:02:51 -0700 Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com> > wrote: > > > Recent events have prompted a Linux position statement on inclusive > > terminology. Given that Linux maintains a coding-style and its own > > idiomatic set of terminology here is a proposal to answer the call to > > replace non-inclusive terminology. > > I'm glad to see this patch. > > > > > Cc: Jonathan Corbet <cor...@lwn.net> > > Cc: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <c...@fb.clm> > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com> > > Acked-by: SeongJae Park <sjp...@amazon.de> > > > --- > > Documentation/process/coding-style.rst | 12 ++++ > > Documentation/process/inclusive-terminology.rst | 64 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Documentation/process/index.rst | 1 > > 3 files changed, 77 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 Documentation/process/inclusive-terminology.rst > > > > 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'. > > I have submitted a couple of patches for automated encouragement of the the > inclusive terms and those merged in the -next tree[1,2] now. Nonetheless, the > version says only "please consider using 'denylist' and 'allowlist' instead of > 'blacklist' and 'whitelist'" for now. I think we could add more terms in > there > based on this discussion. I could do that after this patch is merged, or you > could do that yourself in the next spin of this patch. Please do whatever you > feel comfort. > > [1] > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=7d0bea01dec27195d95d929c1ee49a4a74dd6671 > [2] > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=95a94258ceb27052f00b7e51588a128d20bf05ed >
Thank you for stepping up to take this on, much appreciated. I think I'll leave it to you to fixup checkpatch after the final version of this patch is merged. It may be as simple as "See section 4 'Naming' in coding-style for suggested replacements".
