linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] docs: i2c: summary: document use of inclusive 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56qtono23q4couvjk4rdovqliujkcxjnvo7xrsgb3iturplmrw@o7jjxfklfr4c>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:20:05 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: Easwar Hariharan <eahariha@...ux.microsoft.com>
Cc: linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, 
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] docs: i2c: summary: document use of inclusive
 language

> > +A **target** chip is a node that responds to communications when addressed
> > +by the controller. In Linux it is called a **client**. Client drivers are kept
> 
> Are we continuing to use client instead of local target and remote target?

Nope, "client" is just the Linux word for "target". Like "adapter" for
"controller". Historic legacy. So, in a way "local client" and "remote
client" would also work to emphasize the distinction.

This document so far only talks about "remote targets". I noticed this a
few hours ago and concluded that another paragraph needs to be added
explaining that Linux can be a target as well. And that this is called a
"local target" while the other ones are "remote targets".

Makes sense?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)