linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] 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]

Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 12:57:37 -0700
From: Easwar Hariharan <eahariha@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
 linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: eahariha@...ux.microsoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] docs: i2c: summary: document use of inclusive
 language

On 6/13/2024 12:52 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
>>> +Outdated terminology
>>> +--------------------
>>> +
>>> +Historically, controller was named "master" and client was named "slave". These
> 
> Ahhh, while reworking the series I finally saw that I wrote "client" in
> the line above. That was an oversight, it should have been "target", of
> course. Next time, please quote directly below the errornous line, that
> makes it easier for me to understand what we are talking about.
> 
> Nonetheless, the rework is not in vain. I think the texts have gotten a
> tad better.
> 

Apologies, but that one word wasn't the cause of the confusion. It was:

a) "In Linux it is called a **client**", combined with
b) "The general attitude, however, is to use the inclusive terms:
controller and target. Work to switch over the Linux Kernel is on-going."

I'll try to quote better in the future.

Hope that helps,
Easwar