linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Remove unnecessarily gendered language

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1386124571.13344.4.camel@x230.lan>
Date:	Wed, 4 Dec 2013 02:36:13 +0000
From:	Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
To:	"geert@...ux-m68k.org" <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove unnecessarily gendered language

On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 10:04 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 2:18 AM, Matthew Garrett
> <matthew.garrett@...ula.com> wrote:
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/mesh.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/mesh.c
> > @@ -1190,8 +1190,8 @@ static void handle_msgin(struct mesh_state *ms)
> >                         if (tp->sdtr_state != sdtr_sent) {
> >                                 /* reply with an SDTR */
> >                                 add_sdtr_msg(ms);
> > -                               /* limit period to at least his value,
> > -                                  offset to no more than his */
> > +                               /* limit period to at least its value,
> > +                                  offset to no more than its */
> >                                 if (ms->msgout[3] < ms->msgin[3])
> >                                         ms->msgout[3] = ms->msgin[3];
> >                                 if (ms->msgout[4] > ms->msgin[4])
> 
> I think both occurrences of "his" should actually be "this".

Yeah, I wasn't too sure on this one. I think it's trying to say "limit
the output period to at least that of the input, limit the offset to no
more than the input", so "its" refers to the input message. That's
probably an argument for just rewriting the entire comment instead.

> BTW, the singular they  ("The caller must know what they are doing!")
> feels a bit strange to me, but it seems to match the wikipedia article on
> singular they. As a non-native English speaker, I was not familiar with it.

It's a fairly old convention, but I think it's fair to say that it's not
the most common.

-- 
Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>