[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <s5hlfjnzvu7.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 10:02:24 +0200
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: corbet@....net, ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
SeongJae Park <sjpark@...zon.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tech-board-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v3] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology
On Wed, 08 Jul 2020 20:14:27 +0200,
Dan Williams wrote:
>
> +Recommended replacements for 'blacklist/whitelist' are:
> + 'denylist / allowlist'
> + 'blocklist / passlist'
I started looking through the tree now and noticed there are lots of
patterns like "whitelisted" or "blacklisted". How can the words fit
for those? Actually, there are two cases like:
- Foo is blacklisted
- Allow to load the non-whitelisted cards
Currently I'm replacing the former with "Foo is in denylist", but not
sure about the latter case. I thought Kees mentioned about this, but
don't remember the proposal...
In anyway, I'm for the action:
Acked-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
thanks,
Takashi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists