linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] genpd: Fix up terminology with leader/follower

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 13:04:38 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
        Kieran Bingham <kbingham@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genpd: Fix up terminology with leader/follower

On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 11:04 AM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 8 Jul 2020 at 10:35, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > The genpd infrastructure uses the terms master/slave, but such uses have
> > no external exposures (not even in Documentation/driver-api/pm/*) and are
> > not mandated by nor associated with any external specifications. Change
> > the language used through-out to leader/follower.
>
> In my opinion this doesn't really make it more clear, but rather the opposite.
>
> If we should improve, I suggest using "parent" and "child" instead. As
> matter of fact, that's already the de-facto terminology that people
> are using when talking about master/subdomains of genpd.

IMO "parent" and "child" would be better indeed, because genpd only
supports strict hierarchies.

Thanks!