Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology

Vinod Koul
2020-07-13T04:25:56Z

Hi Mauro,

On 09-07-20, 13:11, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Mon, 06 Jul 2020 06:30:01 -0700
> Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> escreveu:
> >
> > $ git grep -i -w -P '\w*slave\w*' drivers | \
> > cut -f1,2 -d/ | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -20 | cat -n
> > 1 5683 drivers/net
> > 2 2118 drivers/gpu
> > 3 1807 drivers/dma
> > 4 1389 drivers/i2c
> > 5 866 drivers/interconnect
> > 6 835 drivers/soundwire
> > 7 821 drivers/spi
> > 8 698 drivers/w1
> > 9 508 drivers/media
> > 10 481 drivers/infiniband
> > 11 440 drivers/ata
> > 12 317 drivers/scsi
> > 13 267 drivers/fsi
> > 14 240 drivers/tty
> > 15 225 drivers/vme
> > 16 223 drivers/staging
> > 17 157 drivers/mmc
> > 18 155 drivers/usb
> > 19 141 drivers/video
> > 20 140 drivers/char
>
> It sounds that, as soon after this patch gets merged, the mailing lists
> will be flooded by lots of patches replacing such terms with something
> else :-(
>
> Doing a quick look at the media subsystem, it sounds that most terms
> come from I2C master/slave and DiSEqC terminology, as defined by their
> specs (and the others seem to be derived from some hardware vendor
> specific terminology).
>
> As they're all supported by the current specs, if one would want
> to replace them, it should first ensure that the supporting specs
> should be using a different terminology, as otherwise replacing
> them would just make harder for anyone trying to understand the
> code.

I think waiting for specs may result in long delays, we all know how
'fast' spec bodies work!

Putting my soundwire maintainer hat, I see more than 1K uses of 'slave'
in the subsystem due to MIPI defined terms of SoundWire Master/Slave, so
I am planning to replace that and not wait for MIPI to update the spec.

A similar approach where we discuss with relevant stakeholder and arrive
at replacement terms and swap them would be great

Thanks
--
~Vinod