Re: [PATCH] include/hw/xen: Use more inclusive language in comment

[Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>]

On 10/11/2023 10.30, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 09.11.2023 18:40, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> --- a/include/hw/xen/interface/hvm/params.h
>> +++ b/include/hw/xen/interface/hvm/params.h
>> @@ -255,7 +255,7 @@
>>    * Note that 'mixed' mode has not been evaluated for safety from a
>>    * security perspective.  Before using this mode in a
>>    * security-critical environment, each subop should be evaluated for
>> - * safety, with unsafe subops blacklisted in XSM.
>> + * safety, with unsafe subops blocked in XSM.
> 
> To avoid another round trip when you send the patch against xen.git, as
> already asked for by others, I'd like to point out that the wording
> change isn't describing things sufficiently similarly: "blocked" reads
> as if XSM would do so all by itself, whereas "blacklisted" has an
> indication that something needs to be done for XSM to behave in the
> intended way. Minimally I'd suggest "suitably blocked via", but perhaps
> yet better wording can be thought of.

Ok, could then please someone from you Xen guys get this fixed with 
appropriate wording in the xen.git repo? I never checked out that repo 
before and before I now spend hours and hours to figure out how to 
contribute a patch to Xen, just to replace a single word, it's way easier if 
someone with pre-existing Xen experience is taking care of this.

  Thanks,
   Thomas