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: <k7skotoxoml3anejknhcofgk4qbubsxwegfa6c4wyofu7yrdcw@55ezznhofqyz>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 18:14:56 +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 v2 4/6] docs: i2c: summary: document use of inclusive
 language


> I am wondering what the impact of this doc update is on my series[1]. I
> am looking for a straightforward recommendation for what terminology I,
> and hopefully others, should adopt *outside the i2c subsystem*, where
> Linux (typically) has a driver for the controller and is communicating
> with an unknown OS/firmware on the target.
> 
> a) Spec-compliant "controller/target"
> b) Linux implementation/spec hybrid "controller/client", or
> c) Linux implementation "adapter/client"
> 
> I prefer (a), FWIW, so do apparently reviewers on my series.

I also prefer (a), but people should know what (c) means when they look
around in the kernel source. I'll see how it goes with rewording this
patch accordingly.


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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ