Linux converges

It didn’t take long for the consequences of Linus’s surrender to the SJWs to take effect:

Subject [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology
From Dan Williams <>
Date Sat, 04 Jul 2020 13:02:51 -0700

Recent events have prompted a Linux position statement on inclusive
terminology. Given that Linux maintains a coding-style and its own
idiomatic set of terminology here is a proposal to answer the call to
replace non-inclusive terminology.

Cc: Jonathan Corbet
Cc: Kees Cook
Signed-off-by: Chris Mason
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams

 Documentation/process/coding-style.rst          |   12 ++++
 Documentation/process/inclusive-terminology.rst |   64 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 Documentation/process/index.rst                 |    1
 3 files changed, 77 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/process/inclusive-terminology.rst

diff –git a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
index 2657a55c6f12..4b15ab671089 100644
— a/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
@@ -319,6 +319,18 @@ If you are afraid to mix up your local variable names, you have another problem, which is called the function-growth-hormone-imbalance syndrome. See chapter 6 (Functions).

+For symbol names, avoid introducing new usage of the words ‘slave’ and
+’blacklist’. Recommended replacements for ‘slave’ are: ‘secondary’,
+’subordinate’, ‘replica’, ‘responder’, ‘follower’, ‘proxy’, or
+’performer’.  Recommended replacements for blacklist are: ‘blocklist’ or
+Exceptions for introducing new usage is to maintain a userspace ABI, or
+when updating code for an existing (as of 2020) hardware or protocol
+specification that mandates those terms. For new specifications consider
+translating specification usage of the terminology to the kernel coding
+standard where possible. See :ref:`process/inclusive-terminology.rst
+` for details.

And let’s not bother with the whole “well, the changes haven’t been fully adopted and enforced YET” defense. We all know how this is going to end.