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

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]

Date:   Mon, 6 Jul 2020 18:28:19 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tech-board-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        Chris Mason <clm@...clm>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Tech-board-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology

On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 01:17:47 +0300
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com> wrote:

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

The term slave carries a lot more meaning than subordinate. I replied to
someone else but later realized that the person sent me their reply
offlist, so my reply to them was also offlist. What I told them was,
back in college (decades ago), when I first mentioned "master/slave" in
conversation (I think it was about hard drives), a person in that
conversation stated that those were not very nice terms to use. I blew
it off back then, but after listening to more people, I found that
using "slave" even to describe a device is not something that people
care to hear about.

And in actuality, does one device actually enslave another device? I
think that terminology is misleading to begin with.

-- Steve