Re: [PATCH v0 02/14] drm/amdgpu,drm/radeon: Make I2C terminology more inclusive

Easwar Hariharan
2024-03-29T18:51:24Z

On 3/29/2024 10:38 AM, Andi Shyti wrote:
> Hi,
>

<snip>

>
>>>> with more appropriate terms. Inspired by and following on to Wolfram's
>>>> series to fix drivers/i2c/[1], fix the terminology for users of
>>>> I2C_ALGOBIT bitbanging interface, now that the approved verbiage exists
>>>> in the specification.
>>>
>>> The specification talks about:
>>>
>>> - master -> controller
>>> - slave -> target (and not client)
>>>
>>> But both you and Wolfram have used client. I'd like to reach
>>> some more consistency here.
>>
>> I had the impression that remote targets (i.e external to the device) were to be called clients,
>> e.g. the QSFP FRUs in drivers/infiniband, and internal ones targets.
>> I chose the terminology according to that understanding, but now I can't find where I got that
>> information.
>
> The word "client" does not even appear in the documentation (only
> one instance in the i3c document), so that the change is not
> related to the document as stated in the commit log. Unless, of
> course, I am missing something.
>
> I'm OK with choosing a "customized" naming, but we need to reach
> an agreement.
>
> I raised the same question to Wolfram.
>
> Thanks,
> Andi

I don't have a preference between using target and client. As I mentioned in the thread fork, my
information came entirely from Wolfram's cover letter and patch messages. I'll follow along with
whatever you and Wolfram settle on.

Thanks,
Easwar