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=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 AE9A3C433DF for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D184206C3 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="kKjby2j8" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6D184206C3 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ksummit-discuss-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D07F86FE9; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id U-xJTJZYKMpN; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.linuxfoundation.org (lf-lists.osuosl.org [140.211.9.56]) by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 516A786F69; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lf-lists.osuosl.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26FFEC08A8; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34BEC0893 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FC218786B for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from whitealder.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RP1ID9+J3LBF for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:25 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pj1-f65.google.com (mail-pj1-f65.google.com [209.85.216.65]) by whitealder.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A882487730 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pj1-f65.google.com with SMTP id mn17so4688378pjb.4 for ; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 01:54:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=a/XgwapGx7PaAizT65mHU7yvNl7PTQ8EJ96Y04zIcHI=; b=kKjby2j8BdluGT1d4d1Uc52pLcQ41qgyUsoa3BPodKoSXLQp/tMjfHm6Oin7RKRhku Z9Cw6EJhuZekt1PUPfxxbSb1/FuKT2v5FSFWeqE35861BhRIWGBc6lJQfHFXZX4Pn/fo O3oxw9XWxQdXqm6HPR7ETPTAPMzfc7UdnWqVU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=a/XgwapGx7PaAizT65mHU7yvNl7PTQ8EJ96Y04zIcHI=; b=NObyh8/DJ3CT63j056mZRpxYYXnm83HSFndwBkQxfrFKOHpRTv45fLEOUeDCfv6feq wHR5hZMfXh2nch4j4KgPDdlx9V23kTctRmRRf+JLud2RuySNs8RP0qqLA/sCdxOHTySH Ni2xPUVPK8AyfskMR973cb2tuaU46rZFDOJ6Hmi3A4lFq7M5GQ+PF0MCuTucnjKL1tjg JNdivPT1jHChI+/hhn7yxFWYOQpzLBCb+Rxee7fGTk9KgtcFpZbzkmqEZG5NaOribTCd RxnDwkk3jqXsJTEAwbfUxor2aMEGWS7dFfKTqG1gpfYQGmaVTtREvkLjcpiJtsm4XkZM vMMQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533dGVJM7agvMFKIdvUIo/eNajt9ChOHH9E66eKsOBScUr9db793 PLKGb9v1qm0BzOtY+05ujiT7ag== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJypazJZ9697LiGRccbUmXufo/yd1FT8MI/itchdPIrTuUcvQJCZXUBOE65xNLvuRU+tTfRibw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bf02:: with SMTP id c2mr3189920pjs.114.1594112065184; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 01:54:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n15sm244618pgs.25.2020.07.07.01.54.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 07 Jul 2020 01:54:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 01:54:23 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: "Harrosh, Boaz" Message-ID: <202007070137.3ADBEDC@keescook> References: <159389297140.2210796.13590142254668787525.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <202007062234.A90F922DF@keescook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: ksummit , Greg Kroah-Hartman , LKML , "tech-board-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Chris Mason Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology X-BeenThere: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ksummit-discuss-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org Sender: "Ksummit-discuss" On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 06:56:53AM +0000, Harrosh, Boaz wrote: > Kees Cook wrote: > > I have struggled with this as well. The parts of speech change, and my > > grammar senses go weird. whitelist = adjective noun. allow-list = verb > > noun. verbing the adj/noun combo feels okay, but verbing a verb/noun is > > weird. > > > And just using "allowed" and "denied" doesn't impart whether it refers > > to a _single_ instance or a _list_ of instances. > > > But that's all fine. The change is easy to do and is more descriptive > > even if I can't find terms that don't collide with my internal grammar > > checker. ;) > > But why. In English many times a verb when it comes before the noun means an adjective, or an adjective like, describing some traits of the noun. This is kind of my problem being a native English speaker: I can't entirely describe _why_ a grammar construct feels wrong. :( > Example: > I work - work is a verb here. > I used the work bench. - Work is saying something about the type of bench, an adjective. Same as you would say "I used the green bench". Right, so the verb-noun being used as a noun is find, just as adj-noun is. To me, "add it to the allow-list" is entirely sensible just like "set it on the work-bench." It's the "verbing" of a noun that trips me up. "I will whitelist the syscall" -- sounds correct to me (same for "it is whitelisted" or "it is in whitelisting mode"). "I will allow-list the syscall" -- sounds wrong to me (same for "it is allow-listed" or "it is in allow-listing mode"). Similarly, "I will work-bench" sounds wrong to me as does "it is work-benched" or "it is in work-benching mode". > I am not an English native at all but allow-list sounds totally English to me. (I guess the very correct English way is "allowed-list" where the past tense may convert the verb to a noun. but allow-list sounds very good to me as well. Say work-list as opposed to vacation-list do you need to say worked-list? I don't think so.) > > run mate, running mate. cutting board. these are all examples of verbs used as adjectives. Are they not English? What am I missing I would like to learn? "it is in allowing-list mode" sounds even worse. :) But other things require the tense follow the merged verb: "It's already in the allowed-list" sounds fine, where "It's already in the whitelist" had no tense since it lacked a verb. I haven't been able to find an comfortable adjective that means "allow"; "allowable-list" is just long. But, as mentioned earlier -- I have just switched to more descriptive and less weird (to me) sentences. "It is set to deny by default" (instead of "it's a whitelist") or "It's already in the allowed-list". *shrug* -- Kees Cook _______________________________________________ Ksummit-discuss mailing list Ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss 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=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 B3B58C433DF for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89F03206E2 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 08:54:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="kKjby2j8" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727096AbgGGIy0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2020 04:54:26 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56906 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725941AbgGGIyZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jul 2020 04:54:25 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1041.google.com (mail-pj1-x1041.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1041]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B28BCC061755 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 01:54:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1041.google.com with SMTP id k5so8671984pjg.3 for ; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 01:54:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=a/XgwapGx7PaAizT65mHU7yvNl7PTQ8EJ96Y04zIcHI=; b=kKjby2j8BdluGT1d4d1Uc52pLcQ41qgyUsoa3BPodKoSXLQp/tMjfHm6Oin7RKRhku Z9Cw6EJhuZekt1PUPfxxbSb1/FuKT2v5FSFWeqE35861BhRIWGBc6lJQfHFXZX4Pn/fo O3oxw9XWxQdXqm6HPR7ETPTAPMzfc7UdnWqVU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=a/XgwapGx7PaAizT65mHU7yvNl7PTQ8EJ96Y04zIcHI=; b=KmVQL0Vu0gKjQwkFj/mgryPdVMjOWCmmRHbw7IhgcI/z9GRWDDWnsGQPcvgIl19NpW DQPG4w6IHmLrv52psegLGgeP6GMdWUqYv6ONQ9WmGKhyX2BWIdvIy0nOYthQTKVvLSz2 gaFtPfXfbjVgzEzBYX+j4Ere9z/OYig24NiqfZMXL4Xx6+C1Hmzo0hyoHhuogK7VU0tl /TKC2aeLfX3L4PLcqP9CgXF4/bGvNU4xeQoeGJVWzDDWaIHw8nnQGXJox/LjEg2B/zOU drACzXTFC/qXL8wM4ZqUUWU+pM3XOjrwNbIlUIYcTfk1A2HpfWKF2jayfiVHdrie+TTI prIA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531BIBOjldKKpmdmdrQmB7VaQsMxN0grjAvlBXSfmShtgiPpeew8 4O6PDSefrGnxJayldzADu0XHCQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJypazJZ9697LiGRccbUmXufo/yd1FT8MI/itchdPIrTuUcvQJCZXUBOE65xNLvuRU+tTfRibw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bf02:: with SMTP id c2mr3189920pjs.114.1594112065184; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 01:54:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n15sm244618pgs.25.2020.07.07.01.54.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 07 Jul 2020 01:54:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 01:54:23 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: "Harrosh, Boaz" Cc: Andy Lutomirski , ksummit , Greg Kroah-Hartman , LKML , "tech-board-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Chris Mason Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology Message-ID: <202007070137.3ADBEDC@keescook> References: <159389297140.2210796.13590142254668787525.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <202007062234.A90F922DF@keescook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 06:56:53AM +0000, Harrosh, Boaz wrote: > Kees Cook wrote: > > I have struggled with this as well. The parts of speech change, and my > > grammar senses go weird. whitelist = adjective noun. allow-list = verb > > noun. verbing the adj/noun combo feels okay, but verbing a verb/noun is > > weird. > > > And just using "allowed" and "denied" doesn't impart whether it refers > > to a _single_ instance or a _list_ of instances. > > > But that's all fine. The change is easy to do and is more descriptive > > even if I can't find terms that don't collide with my internal grammar > > checker. ;) > > But why. In English many times a verb when it comes before the noun means an adjective, or an adjective like, describing some traits of the noun. This is kind of my problem being a native English speaker: I can't entirely describe _why_ a grammar construct feels wrong. :( > Example: > I work - work is a verb here. > I used the work bench. - Work is saying something about the type of bench, an adjective. Same as you would say "I used the green bench". Right, so the verb-noun being used as a noun is find, just as adj-noun is. To me, "add it to the allow-list" is entirely sensible just like "set it on the work-bench." It's the "verbing" of a noun that trips me up. "I will whitelist the syscall" -- sounds correct to me (same for "it is whitelisted" or "it is in whitelisting mode"). "I will allow-list the syscall" -- sounds wrong to me (same for "it is allow-listed" or "it is in allow-listing mode"). Similarly, "I will work-bench" sounds wrong to me as does "it is work-benched" or "it is in work-benching mode". > I am not an English native at all but allow-list sounds totally English to me. (I guess the very correct English way is "allowed-list" where the past tense may convert the verb to a noun. but allow-list sounds very good to me as well. Say work-list as opposed to vacation-list do you need to say worked-list? I don't think so.) > > run mate, running mate. cutting board. these are all examples of verbs used as adjectives. Are they not English? What am I missing I would like to learn? "it is in allowing-list mode" sounds even worse. :) But other things require the tense follow the merged verb: "It's already in the allowed-list" sounds fine, where "It's already in the whitelist" had no tense since it lacked a verb. I haven't been able to find an comfortable adjective that means "allow"; "allowable-list" is just long. But, as mentioned earlier -- I have just switched to more descriptive and less weird (to me) sentences. "It is set to deny by default" (instead of "it's a whitelist") or "It's already in the allowed-list". *shrug* -- Kees Cook From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=a/XgwapGx7PaAizT65mHU7yvNl7PTQ8EJ96Y04zIcHI=; b=kKjby2j8BdluGT1d4d1Uc52pLcQ41qgyUsoa3BPodKoSXLQp/tMjfHm6Oin7RKRhku Z9Cw6EJhuZekt1PUPfxxbSb1/FuKT2v5FSFWeqE35861BhRIWGBc6lJQfHFXZX4Pn/fo O3oxw9XWxQdXqm6HPR7ETPTAPMzfc7UdnWqVU= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 01:54:23 -0700 From: Kees Cook Message-ID: <202007070137.3ADBEDC@keescook> References: <159389297140.2210796.13590142254668787525.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <202007062234.A90F922DF@keescook> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Tech-board-discuss] [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH] CodingStyle: Inclusive Terminology List-Id: Public TAB discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Harrosh, Boaz" Cc: ksummit , Greg Kroah-Hartman , LKML , "tech-board-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , Andy Lutomirski , Chris Mason On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 06:56:53AM +0000, Harrosh, Boaz wrote: > Kees Cook wrote: > > I have struggled with this as well. The parts of speech change, and my > > grammar senses go weird. whitelist = adjective noun. allow-list = verb > > noun. verbing the adj/noun combo feels okay, but verbing a verb/noun is > > weird. > > > And just using "allowed" and "denied" doesn't impart whether it refers > > to a _single_ instance or a _list_ of instances. > > > But that's all fine. The change is easy to do and is more descriptive > > even if I can't find terms that don't collide with my internal grammar > > checker. ;) > > But why. In English many times a verb when it comes before the noun means an adjective, or an adjective like, describing some traits of the noun. This is kind of my problem being a native English speaker: I can't entirely describe _why_ a grammar construct feels wrong. :( > Example: > I work - work is a verb here. > I used the work bench. - Work is saying something about the type of bench, an adjective. Same as you would say "I used the green bench". Right, so the verb-noun being used as a noun is find, just as adj-noun is. To me, "add it to the allow-list" is entirely sensible just like "set it on the work-bench." It's the "verbing" of a noun that trips me up. "I will whitelist the syscall" -- sounds correct to me (same for "it is whitelisted" or "it is in whitelisting mode"). "I will allow-list the syscall" -- sounds wrong to me (same for "it is allow-listed" or "it is in allow-listing mode"). Similarly, "I will work-bench" sounds wrong to me as does "it is work-benched" or "it is in work-benching mode". > I am not an English native at all but allow-list sounds totally English to me. (I guess the very correct English way is "allowed-list" where the past tense may convert the verb to a noun. but allow-list sounds very good to me as well. Say work-list as opposed to vacation-list do you need to say worked-list? I don't think so.) > > run mate, running mate. cutting board. these are all examples of verbs used as adjectives. Are they not English? What am I missing I would like to learn? "it is in allowing-list mode" sounds even worse. :) But other things require the tense follow the merged verb: "It's already in the allowed-list" sounds fine, where "It's already in the whitelist" had no tense since it lacked a verb. I haven't been able to find an comfortable adjective that means "allow"; "allowable-list" is just long. But, as mentioned earlier -- I have just switched to more descriptive and less weird (to me) sentences. "It is set to deny by default" (instead of "it's a whitelist") or "It's already in the allowed-list". *shrug* -- Kees Cook