From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CE01C433E0 for ; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 21:29:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 007642065C for ; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 21:29:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727906AbgFNV3N (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Jun 2020 17:29:13 -0400 Received: from jabberwock.ucw.cz ([46.255.230.98]:48594 "EHLO jabberwock.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726648AbgFNV3N (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Jun 2020 17:29:13 -0400 Received: by jabberwock.ucw.cz (Postfix, from userid 1017) id C48C11C0BD2; Sun, 14 Jun 2020 23:29:11 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2020 23:29:11 +0200 From: Pavel Machek To: Michael Ellerman Cc: Jiri Slaby , SeongJae Park , Joe Perches , akpm@linux-foundation.org, apw@canonical.com, SeongJae Park , colin.king@canonical.com, sj38.park@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/2] Recommend denylist/allowlist instead of blacklist/whitelist Message-ID: <20200614212911.GB24529@amd> References: <20200611073804.10225-1-sjpark@amazon.com> <38ac91ab-ced3-8a4f-b825-4503fdcddeb8@suse.cz> <877dwcfitg.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="MW5yreqqjyrRcusr" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <877dwcfitg.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --MW5yreqqjyrRcusr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat 2020-06-13 00:40:59, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Jiri Slaby writes: > > On 11. 06. 20, 9:38, SeongJae Park wrote: > >> On Wed, 10 Jun 2020 23:35:24 -0700 Joe Perches wrote: > >>> On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 08:25 +0200, SeongJae Park wrote: > >>>> From: SeongJae Park > >>>> > >>>> This patchset 1) adds support of deprecated terms in the 'checkpatch= =2Epl' > >>>> and 2) set the 'blacklist' and 'whitelist' as deprecated with > >>>> replacement suggestion of 'denylist' and 'allowlist', because the > >>>> suggestions are incontrovertible, doesn't make people hurt, and more > >>>> self-explanatory. > >>> > >>> While the checkpatch implementation is better, > >>> I'm still very "meh" about the whole concept. > >>=20 > >> I can understand your concerns about politic things in the second patc= h. > >> However, the concept of the 'deprecated terms' in the first patch is n= ot > >> political but applicable to the general cases. We already had the com= mits[1] > >> for a similar case. So, could you ack for at least the first patch? > >>=20 > >> [1] https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=3Dnews_item&px=3DLinux-Kern= el-Hugs > > > > Fuck you! replaced by hug you! is a completely different story. The > > former is indeed offending to majority (despite it's quite common to > > tell someone "fuck you" in my subregion; OTOH hugging, no way -- I'm a > > straight non-communist). If it turns out that any word (e.g. blacklist) > > offends _majority_ (or at least a significant part of it) of some > > minority or culture, then sure, we should send it to /dev/null. > > should by no means listen to extreme individuals. >=20 > I agree you have to draw the line somewhere, there will always be > someone somewhere that's offended by something. But this seems like a > pretty easy case. >=20 > It's not like blacklist / whitelist are even good to begin with, it's > not obvious which is which, you have to learn that black is bad and > white is good. >=20 > Blocklist (or denylist?) and allowlist are actually more descriptive and > less likely to cause confusion. You do not understand how word "blacklist" is used inside the kernel, do you? Do a quick grep. Pavel --=20 (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo= g.html --MW5yreqqjyrRcusr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAl7mlqcACgkQMOfwapXb+vLVHQCeLR9BjgTY+oHUi1XFMXuPB+wR 1QQAoIBeNk2dUqngwfvHEz/sVZpMNoiL =mvXj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --MW5yreqqjyrRcusr--