[PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c      | 24 ++++++++++++------------
 arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c |  2 +-
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c b/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
index a1d2c4ae0d1b..c755c4c92fa9 100644
--- a/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
+++ b/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
 	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
 	 */
 	if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 << 16)))
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 oh_my_gawd:
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
 	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at the wrong register.
 	 */
 	if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48)) {
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 	}
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
 	 * anything but 32-bit words ...
 	 */
 	addr = &bridge->b_type0_cfg_dev[slot].f[fn].l[where >> 2];
@@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static int pci_conf1_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
 	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
 	 */
 	if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 << 16)))
@@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ static int pci_conf1_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 oh_my_gawd:
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
 	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at the wrong register.
 	 */
 	if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48)) {
@@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ static int pci_conf1_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 	}
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
 	 * anything but 32-bit words ...
 	 */
 	bridge->b_pci_cfg = (busno << 16) | (slot << 11);
@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
 	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
 	 */
 	if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 << 16)))
@@ -213,14 +213,14 @@ static int pci_conf0_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 oh_my_gawd:
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
 	 * generic PCI code a chance to touch the wrong register.
 	 */
 	if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48))
 		return PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL;
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
 	 * anything but 32-bit words ...
 	 */
 	addr = &bridge->b_type0_cfg_dev[slot].f[fn].l[where >> 2];
@@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ static int pci_conf1_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
 	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
 	 */
 	if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 << 16)))
@@ -281,14 +281,14 @@ static int pci_conf1_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
 oh_my_gawd:
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
 	 * generic PCI code a chance to touch the wrong register.
 	 */
 	if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48))
 		return PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL;
 
 	/*
-	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
+	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
 	 * anything but 32-bit words ...
 	 */
 	addr = &bridge->b_type0_cfg_dev[slot].f[fn].l[where >> 2];
diff --git a/arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c b/arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c
index b69daa02401b..50f04fe491ca 100644
--- a/arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c
+++ b/arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ void __init plat_mem_setup(void)
 	board_be_init = ip22_be_init;
 
 	/* Init the INDY HPC I/O controller.  Need to call this before
-	 * fucking with the memory controller because it needs to know the
+	 * hugging with the memory controller because it needs to know the
 	 * boardID and whether this is a Guiness or a FullHouse machine.
 	 */
 	sgihpc_init();
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>

Since v17 of the SGX patch set, my cover letters get cut for some
reason. I receive them myself but they don't appear on kernel
lists. I don't what the hug is going on :-/

Here's the cover letter for this patch set:

From 386420215a93d2eb5bbcb061e914cfb16f456de8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 11:25:40 -0800
Subject: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Jarkko Sakkinen (15):
  MIPS: replace **** with a hug
  Documentation: replace **** with a hug
  drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug
  m68k: replace **** with a hug
  parisc: replace **** with a hug
  cpufreq: replace **** with a hug
  ide: replace **** with a hug
  media: replace **** with a hug
  mtd: replace **** with a hug
  net/sunhme: replace **** with a hug
  scsi: replace **** with a hug
  inotify: replace **** with a hug
  irq: replace **** with a hug
  lib: replace **** with a hug
  net: replace **** with a hug

 Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst      |  2 +-
 arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h              |  2 +-
 arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c                    | 24 +++++++++----------
 arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c               |  2 +-
 arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c               |  2 +-
 drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c                 |  2 +-
 .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c   |  2 +-
 .../nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc    |  2 +-
 drivers/ide/cmd640.c                          |  2 +-
 drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c                     |  8 ++++---
 drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c                     |  2 +-
 drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c             |  4 ++--
 drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h                      |  2 +-
 fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c              |  2 +-
 kernel/irq/timings.c                          |  2 +-
 lib/vsprintf.c                                |  2 +-
 net/core/skbuff.c                             |  2 +-
 17 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)

-- 
2.19.1

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Nikolay Borisov]

On 30.11.18 г. 21:57 ч., Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Since v17 of the SGX patch set, my cover letters get cut for some
> reason. I receive them myself but they don't appear on kernel
> lists. I don't what the hug is going on :-/
> 
> Here's the cover letter for this patch set:
> 
> From 386420215a93d2eb5bbcb061e914cfb16f456de8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 11:25:40 -0800
> Subject: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3
> 
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

I find it quite ridiculous that grown up people are engaging at yet
another coc-related conversation and are on the way to blowing it out of
proportions. Let's focus on improving the ACTUAL code what's the point
to bikeshed on the word?

I've seen people before me comment that some comments are plainly out of
date and that warrants their removal but otherwise nitpicking things
like that. It seems common sense is very scant these days...



> 
> Jarkko Sakkinen (15):
>   MIPS: replace **** with a hug
>   Documentation: replace **** with a hug
>   drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug
>   m68k: replace **** with a hug
>   parisc: replace **** with a hug
>   cpufreq: replace **** with a hug
>   ide: replace **** with a hug
>   media: replace **** with a hug
>   mtd: replace **** with a hug
>   net/sunhme: replace **** with a hug
>   scsi: replace **** with a hug
>   inotify: replace **** with a hug
>   irq: replace **** with a hug
>   lib: replace **** with a hug
>   net: replace **** with a hug
> 
>  Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst      |  2 +-
>  arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h              |  2 +-
>  arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c                    | 24 +++++++++----------
>  arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c               |  2 +-
>  arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c               |  2 +-
>  drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c                 |  2 +-
>  .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c   |  2 +-
>  .../nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc    |  2 +-
>  drivers/ide/cmd640.c                          |  2 +-
>  drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c                     |  8 ++++---
>  drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c                     |  2 +-
>  drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c             |  4 ++--
>  drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h                      |  2 +-
>  fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c              |  2 +-
>  kernel/irq/timings.c                          |  2 +-
>  lib/vsprintf.c                                |  2 +-
>  net/core/skbuff.c                             |  2 +-
>  17 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> 

Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:06:30PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> I find it quite ridiculous that grown up people are engaging at yet
> another coc-related conversation and are on the way to blowing it out of
> proportions. Let's focus on improving the ACTUAL code what's the point
> to bikeshed on the word?
> 
> I've seen people before me comment that some comments are plainly out of
> date and that warrants their removal but otherwise nitpicking things
> like that. It seems common sense is very scant these days...

I have absolutely nothing against CoC.

If you look up from LKML, there total zero posts from criticizing of
having such. OK, maybe I find it bit too high-level, and yeah, this
patch set has been useful to know where the line is. I can go through
the commits and think more appropriate alternatives (thus the RFC-tag).

Thanks.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Nikolay Borisov]

On 30.11.18 г. 23:50 ч., Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:06:30PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> I find it quite ridiculous that grown up people are engaging at yet
>> another coc-related conversation and are on the way to blowing it out of
>> proportions. Let's focus on improving the ACTUAL code what's the point
>> to bikeshed on the word?
>>
>> I've seen people before me comment that some comments are plainly out of
>> date and that warrants their removal but otherwise nitpicking things
>> like that. It seems common sense is very scant these days...
> 
> I have absolutely nothing against CoC.

I didn't mean you are against the CoC, I meant it's ridiculous to follow
it so closely.

And regarding 'fuck', I believe this is rather pertinent as to why this
patchset is unnecessary:

https://ia801406.us.archive.org/30/items/JackWagnerattr.MontyPythontheWordFuck/The_Word_Fuck.ogg

> 
> If you look up from LKML, there total zero posts from criticizing of
> having such. OK, maybe I find it bit too high-level, and yeah, this
> patch set has been useful to know where the line is. I can go through
> the commits and think more appropriate alternatives (thus the RFC-tag).
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> /Jarkko
> 

Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Al Viro]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

OK, that's it - from now on I'm switching to use of CoC as
a general-purpose obscene verb.  As in "this protocol is
completely CoCed in head", etc.

Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Randy Dunlap]

On 11/30/18 1:13 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27:10AM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> OK, that's it - from now on I'm switching to use of CoC as
> a general-purpose obscene verb.  As in "this protocol is
> completely CoCed in head", etc.
> 

ack that.

-- 
~Randy

Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Joshua Kinard]

On 11/30/2018 2:27 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c      | 24 ++++++++++++------------
>  arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c |  2 +-
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c b/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
> index a1d2c4ae0d1b..c755c4c92fa9 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
>  	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
>  	 */
>  	if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 << 16)))
> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  oh_my_gawd:
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
>  	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at the wrong register.
>  	 */
>  	if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48)) {
> @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  	}
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
>  	 * anything but 32-bit words ...
>  	 */
>  	addr = &bridge->b_type0_cfg_dev[slot].f[fn].l[where >> 2];
> @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static int pci_conf1_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
>  	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
>  	 */
>  	if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 << 16)))
> @@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ static int pci_conf1_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  oh_my_gawd:
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
>  	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at the wrong register.
>  	 */
>  	if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48)) {
> @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ static int pci_conf1_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  	}
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
>  	 * anything but 32-bit words ...
>  	 */
>  	bridge->b_pci_cfg = (busno << 16) | (slot << 11);
> @@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
>  	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
>  	 */
>  	if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 << 16)))
> @@ -213,14 +213,14 @@ static int pci_conf0_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  oh_my_gawd:
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
>  	 * generic PCI code a chance to touch the wrong register.
>  	 */
>  	if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48))
>  		return PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
>  	 * anything but 32-bit words ...
>  	 */
>  	addr = &bridge->b_type0_cfg_dev[slot].f[fn].l[where >> 2];
> @@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ static int pci_conf1_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
>  	 * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
>  	 */
>  	if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 << 16)))
> @@ -281,14 +281,14 @@ static int pci_conf1_write_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  oh_my_gawd:
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
>  	 * generic PCI code a chance to touch the wrong register.
>  	 */
>  	if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48))
>  		return PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't try to access
>  	 * anything but 32-bit words ...
>  	 */
>  	addr = &bridge->b_type0_cfg_dev[slot].f[fn].l[where >> 2];

[snip]

NAK'ed to all of the proposed changes to ops-bridge.c.  The SGI IOC3 chip is an
abomination out of some dark, Lovecraftian nightmare, and the code comment is,
truthfully, being somewhat nice in its description of things.  They need to
remain as-is as a warning to future generations of how not to design
multifunction/multidevice chipsets.

-- 
Joshua Kinard
Gentoo/MIPS
kumba@gentoo.org
rsa6144/5C63F4E3F5C6C943 2015-04-27
177C 1972 1FB8 F254 BAD0 3E72 5C63 F4E3 F5C6 C943

"The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us.  And our
lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between."

--Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic

Re: [PATCH RFC 01/15] MIPS: replace **** with a hug

[Mike Galbraith]

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 11:27 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c      | 24 ++++++++++++------------
>  arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c |  2 +-
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c b/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
> index a1d2c4ae0d1b..c755c4c92fa9 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ static int pci_conf0_read_config(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
>  		return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even give the
> +	 * IOC3 is hugging hugged beyond belief ...  Don't even give the

This obfuscation is a complete waste of reader brain cycles, as it will
transparently be reverted to the original in order to restore meaning.

	-Mike 

[PATCH RFC 02/15] Documentation: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
index 519673df0e82..e16a850261d5 100644
--- a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
+++ b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
@@ -958,7 +958,7 @@ grabs a read lock, searches a list, fails to find what it wants, drops
 the read lock, grabs a write lock and inserts the object has a race
 condition.
 
-If you don't see why, please stay the fuck away from my code.
+If you don't see why, please stay the hug away from my code.
 
 Racing Timers: A Kernel Pastime
 -------------------------------
-- 
2.19.1

[PATCH RFC 03/15] drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c        | 2 +-
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
index 9cc10e438b3d..55a0060881ea 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
@@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ init_ram_restrict(struct nvbios_init *init)
 {
 	/* This appears to be the behaviour of the VBIOS parser, and *is*
 	 * important to cache the NV_PEXTDEV_BOOT0 on later chipsets to
-	 * avoid fucking up the memory controller (somehow) by reading it
+	 * avoid hugging up the memory controller (somehow) by reading it
 	 * on every INIT_RAM_RESTRICT_ZM_GROUP opcode.
 	 *
 	 * Preserving the non-caching behaviour on earlier chipsets just
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
index 3737bd27f74e..ee364c71cc2e 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
 #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_SET_SUBINTR                                  0x00000800
 #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_SET_WATCHDOG                                 0x00000002
 #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR                                              0x0014
-#define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR_MASK                    /* fuck i hate envyas */ -1
+#define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR_MASK                    /* hug i hate envyas */ -1
 #define NV_PPWR_INTR_ROUTE                                               0x001c
 #define NV_PPWR_TIMER_LOW                                                0x002c
 #define NV_PPWR_WATCHDOG_TIME                                            0x0034
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 03/15] drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug

[Diego Viola]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:30 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c        | 2 +-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> index 9cc10e438b3d..55a0060881ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ init_ram_restrict(struct nvbios_init *init)
>  {
>         /* This appears to be the behaviour of the VBIOS parser, and *is*
>          * important to cache the NV_PEXTDEV_BOOT0 on later chipsets to
> -        * avoid fucking up the memory controller (somehow) by reading it
> +        * avoid hugging up the memory controller (somehow) by reading it
>          * on every INIT_RAM_RESTRICT_ZM_GROUP opcode.
>          *
>          * Preserving the non-caching behaviour on earlier chipsets just
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> index 3737bd27f74e..ee364c71cc2e 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
>  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_SET_SUBINTR                                  0x00000800
>  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_SET_WATCHDOG                                 0x00000002
>  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR                                              0x0014
> -#define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR_MASK                    /* fuck i hate envyas */ -1
> +#define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR_MASK                    /* hug i hate envyas */ -1

Can you also capitalize the "i" please?

Thanks,
Diego

Re: [PATCH RFC 03/15] drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 06:13:50PM -0200, Diego Viola wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:30 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c        | 2 +-
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc | 2 +-
> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> > index 9cc10e438b3d..55a0060881ea 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> > @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ init_ram_restrict(struct nvbios_init *init)
> >  {
> >         /* This appears to be the behaviour of the VBIOS parser, and *is*
> >          * important to cache the NV_PEXTDEV_BOOT0 on later chipsets to
> > -        * avoid fucking up the memory controller (somehow) by reading it
> > +        * avoid hugging up the memory controller (somehow) by reading it
> >          * on every INIT_RAM_RESTRICT_ZM_GROUP opcode.
> >          *
> >          * Preserving the non-caching behaviour on earlier chipsets just
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> > index 3737bd27f74e..ee364c71cc2e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> > @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
> >  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_SET_SUBINTR                                  0x00000800
> >  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_SET_WATCHDOG                                 0x00000002
> >  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR                                              0x0014
> > -#define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR_MASK                    /* fuck i hate envyas */ -1
> > +#define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR_MASK                    /* hug i hate envyas */ -1
> 
> Can you also capitalize the "i" please?

Yeah, maybe I just change it as "/* I hate envyas */"?

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 03/15] drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug

[Diego Viola]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 7:26 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 06:13:50PM -0200, Diego Viola wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:30 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
> > <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c        | 2 +-
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc | 2 +-
> > >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> > > index 9cc10e438b3d..55a0060881ea 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
> > > @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ init_ram_restrict(struct nvbios_init *init)
> > >  {
> > >         /* This appears to be the behaviour of the VBIOS parser, and *is*
> > >          * important to cache the NV_PEXTDEV_BOOT0 on later chipsets to
> > > -        * avoid fucking up the memory controller (somehow) by reading it
> > > +        * avoid hugging up the memory controller (somehow) by reading it
> > >          * on every INIT_RAM_RESTRICT_ZM_GROUP opcode.
> > >          *
> > >          * Preserving the non-caching behaviour on earlier chipsets just
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> > > index 3737bd27f74e..ee364c71cc2e 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
> > > @@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
> > >  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_SET_SUBINTR                                  0x00000800
> > >  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_SET_WATCHDOG                                 0x00000002
> > >  #define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR                                              0x0014
> > > -#define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR_MASK                    /* fuck i hate envyas */ -1
> > > +#define NV_PPWR_INTR_EN_CLR_MASK                    /* hug i hate envyas */ -1
> >
> > Can you also capitalize the "i" please?
>
> Yeah, maybe I just change it as "/* I hate envyas */"?
>
> /Jarkko

Yes, that looks better.

Thanks,
Diego

[PATCH RFC 04/15] m68k: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h
index 309d6e6a1374..90206bcfebb6 100644
--- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h
+++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ extern void sun3_enable_interrupts (void);
 extern void sun3_disable_interrupts (void);
 extern volatile unsigned char* sun3_intreg;
 
-/* master list of VME vectors -- don't fuck with this */
+/* master list of VME vectors -- don't hug with this */
 #define SUN3_VEC_FLOPPY		(IRQ_USER+0)
 #define SUN3_VEC_VMESCSI0	(IRQ_USER+0)
 #define SUN3_VEC_VMESCSI1	(IRQ_USER+1)
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 04/15] m68k: replace **** with a hug

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 11/30/18 8:27 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> -/* master list of VME vectors -- don't fuck with this */
> +/* master list of VME vectors -- don't hug with this */

Never in my dreams would I have expected that the dystopia predicted
in "Demolition Man" would ever come true and that so early.

I'm waiting for the automatic punishment machines which spit out tickets
whenever someone in their proximity utters a swearword.

Adrian


-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Re: [PATCH RFC 04/15] m68k: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:44:24PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 11/30/18 8:27 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> > 
> > -/* master list of VME vectors -- don't fuck with this */
> > +/* master list of VME vectors -- don't hug with this */
> 
> Never in my dreams would I have expected that the dystopia predicted
> in "Demolition Man" would ever come true and that so early.
> 
> I'm waiting for the automatic punishment machines which spit out tickets
> whenever someone in their proximity utters a swearword.

Sorry I had 10h flight, internet connection not properly working and too
much time :-) I thought that with the new CoC I could not grep the
f-word from the kernel tree but there it was...

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 04/15] m68k: replace **** with a hug

[Jiri Kosina]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:

> > Never in my dreams would I have expected that the dystopia predicted
> > in "Demolition Man" would ever come true and that so early.
> > 
> > I'm waiting for the automatic punishment machines which spit out tickets
> > whenever someone in their proximity utters a swearword.
> 
> Sorry I had 10h flight, internet connection not properly working and too
> much time :-) 

To be totally honest, to me that feels like a little bit too weak excuse 
for wasting time and energy of gazillion other people with your patches.

> I thought that with the new CoC I could not grep the f-word from the 
> kernel tree but there it was...

Sorry, but you were wrong. It's not retro-active.

-- 
Jiri Kosina

[PATCH RFC 05/15] parisc: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c b/arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c
index 376ea0d1b275..4782c41f00c8 100644
--- a/arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c
+++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c
@@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ asmlinkage unsigned long sys_mmap(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
 	}
 }
 
-/* Fucking broken ABI */
+/* Hugging broken ABI */
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
 asmlinkage long parisc_truncate64(const char __user * path,
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 05/15] parisc: replace **** with a hug

[Dennis Clarke]

On 11/30/18 2:27 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 

To be honest the source has been full of sh!t and other expressions
for a long long time now. I am sure we all know this and it would
take a pile of effort to clean^H^H^H^Hsanitize and ruin the flavour and
ambiance of the whole damn thing.  Everyone knows this :


c $ find . -type f | xargs grep -ic " shit " | grep -v ":0$" | awk 
'BEGIN{FS=":";print "\nshitlist"}{print $2 " " $1}' | sort -n

shitlist
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_driver.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/arch/sparc/kernel/pcic.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/arch/sparc/mm/srmmu.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/ata/sata_via.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_file_ops.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_link.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/net/wan/z85230.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/3945-mac.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/sound/pci/ac97/ac97_patch.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/sound/pci/cs46xx/dsp_spos_scb_lib.c
c $

c $ find . -type f | xargs grep -ic " piss " | grep -v ":0$" | awk 
'BEGIN{FS=":";print "\npisspot"}{print $2 " " $1}' | sort -n

pisspot
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/Documentation/translations/ja_JP/SubmittingPatches
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/SubmittingPatches
c $

c $ grep -in " piss " 
./linux-4.20-rc4/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
817:Greg Kroah-Hartman, "How to piss off a kernel subsystem maintainer".


c $ find . -type f | xargs grep -ic " fuck " | grep -v ":0$" | awk 
'BEGIN{FS=":";print "\nfucked"}{print $2 " " $1}' | sort -n

fucked
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c
c $


c $ find . -type f | xargs grep -ic " fucked " | grep -v ":0$" | awk 
'BEGIN{FS=":";print "\nreally fucked"}{print $2 " " $1}' | sort -n

really fucked
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/drivers/ide/cmd640.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
1 ./linux-4.20-rc4/lib/vsprintf.c
12 ./linux-4.20-rc4/arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c
c $

The finest example of colorful comments is arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c:


     54          addr = 
&bridge->b_type0_cfg_dev[slot].f[fn].c[PCI_VENDOR_ID];
     55          if (get_dbe(cf, (u32 *) addr))
     56                  return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
     57
     58          /*
     59           * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even 
give the
     60           * generic PCI code a chance to look at it for real ...
     61           */
     62          if (cf == (PCI_VENDOR_ID_SGI | (PCI_DEVICE_ID_SGI_IOC3 
<< 16)))
     63                  goto oh_my_gawd;
     64
.
.
.
     76  oh_my_gawd:
     77
     78          /*
     79           * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't even 
give the
     80           * generic PCI code a chance to look at the wrong register.
     81           */
     82          if ((where >= 0x14 && where < 0x40) || (where >= 0x48)) {
     83                  *value = emulate_ioc3_cfg(where, size);
     84                  return PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL;
     85          }
     86
     87          /*
     88           * IOC3 is fucking fucked beyond belief ...  Don't try 
to access
     89           * anything but 32-bit words ...
     90           */
     91          addr = &bridge->b_type0_cfg_dev[slot].f[fn].l[where >> 2];
     92


Ah yes .. I remember the days when IBM bought Lotus and no one could
have a beer in the office anymore.  Everyone that was good walked out.
Let's not do that.

Dennis Clarke

Re: [PATCH RFC 05/15] parisc: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 05:48:33PM -0500, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> Ah yes .. I remember the days when IBM bought Lotus and no one could
> have a beer in the office anymore.  Everyone that was good walked out.
> Let's not do that.

Thank you for englightning response. Only today I learned about the 2nd
amendment that overrides the 1st amendment so all is good :-) I hope we
never get 3rd amandment to make this even more confusing...

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 05/15] parisc: replace **** with a hug

[Diego Viola]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:30 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c b/arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c
> index 376ea0d1b275..4782c41f00c8 100644
> --- a/arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c
> +++ b/arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c
> @@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ asmlinkage unsigned long sys_mmap(unsigned long addr, unsigned long len,
>         }
>  }
>
> -/* Fucking broken ABI */
> +/* Hugging broken ABI */
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
>  asmlinkage long parisc_truncate64(const char __user * path,
> --
> 2.19.1
>

What about profanity in commit messages?

[PATCH RFC 06/15] cpufreq: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c
index d6cb052b0a75..302315ad3786 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c
@@ -574,7 +574,7 @@ static int acer_cpufreq_pst(const struct dmi_system_id *d)
 }
 
 /*
- * Some Athlon laptops have really fucked PST tables.
+ * Some Athlon laptops have really hugged PST tables.
  * A BIOS update is all that can save them.
  * Mention this, and disable cpufreq.
  */
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 06/15] cpufreq: replace **** with a hug

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 8:28 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c b/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c
> index d6cb052b0a75..302315ad3786 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c
> @@ -574,7 +574,7 @@ static int acer_cpufreq_pst(const struct dmi_system_id *d)
>  }
>
>  /*
> - * Some Athlon laptops have really fucked PST tables.
> + * Some Athlon laptops have really hugged PST tables.

Can we just say "broken"?

>   * A BIOS update is all that can save them.
>   * Mention this, and disable cpufreq.
>   */
> --
> 2.19.1
>

[PATCH RFC 07/15] ide: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/ide/cmd640.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/ide/cmd640.c b/drivers/ide/cmd640.c
index 004243bd84db..c3b7abf314af 100644
--- a/drivers/ide/cmd640.c
+++ b/drivers/ide/cmd640.c
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
  *  This file provides support for the advanced features and bugs
  *  of IDE interfaces using the CMD Technologies 0640 IDE interface chip.
  *
- *  These chips are basically fucked by design, and getting this driver
+ *  These chips are basically hugged by design, and getting this driver
  *  to work on every motherboard design that uses this screwed chip seems
  *  bloody well impossible.  However, we're still trying.
  *
-- 
2.19.1

[PATCH RFC 08/15] media: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug. In
addition, fix a coding style issue (lines with over 80 chars).

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c | 8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c b/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c
index 472e37637c8d..c0f198b764f0 100644
--- a/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c
+++ b/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c
@@ -165,9 +165,11 @@ static int bt819_init(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
 		0x0f, 0x00,	/* 0x0f Hue control */
 		0x12, 0x04,	/* 0x12 Output Format */
 		0x13, 0x20,	/* 0x13 Vertial Scaling msb 0x00
-					   chroma comb OFF, line drop scaling, interlace scaling
-					   BUG? Why does turning the chroma comb on fuck up color?
-					   Bug in the bt819 stepping on my board?
+					   chroma comb OFF, line drop scaling,
+					   interlace scaling BUG? Why does
+					   turning the chroma comb on hug up
+					   color?  Bug in the bt819 stepping on
+					   my board?
 					*/
 		0x14, 0x00,	/* 0x14 Vertial Scaling lsb */
 		0x16, 0x07,	/* 0x16 Video Timing Polarity
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 08/15] media: replace **** with a hug

[Tomasz Figa]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:28 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug. In
> addition, fix a coding style issue (lines with over 80 chars).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c b/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c
> index 472e37637c8d..c0f198b764f0 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c
> @@ -165,9 +165,11 @@ static int bt819_init(struct v4l2_subdev *sd)
>                 0x0f, 0x00,     /* 0x0f Hue control */
>                 0x12, 0x04,     /* 0x12 Output Format */
>                 0x13, 0x20,     /* 0x13 Vertial Scaling msb 0x00
> -                                          chroma comb OFF, line drop scaling, interlace scaling
> -                                          BUG? Why does turning the chroma comb on fuck up color?
> -                                          Bug in the bt819 stepping on my board?
> +                                          chroma comb OFF, line drop scaling,
> +                                          interlace scaling BUG? Why does
> +                                          turning the chroma comb on hug up

Putting the strong language aside, this comment could actually benefit
from rewording to make it convey more information about the problem.
For example, wouldn't

NOTE: The chroma comb causes a random color distortion on some boards
(stepping of the chip?).

be much more meaningful? I had to guess what f**king up was supposed
to mean here, which is obviously a problem with this comment. It could
be extended even more by mentioning what board and chip stepping it
was observed on.

Best regards,
Tomasz

[PATCH RFC 09/15] mtd: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c b/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
index b0d44f9214b0..bdf68678fccc 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
@@ -565,7 +565,7 @@ int register_mtd_blktrans(struct mtd_blktrans_ops *tr)
 	int ret;
 
 	/* Register the notifier if/when the first device type is
-	   registered, to prevent the link/init ordering from fucking
+	   registered, to prevent the link/init ordering from hugging
 	   us over. */
 	if (!blktrans_notifier.list.next)
 		register_mtd_user(&blktrans_notifier);
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 09/15] mtd: replace **** with a hug

[Boris Brezillon]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 11:27:18 -0800
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c b/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> index b0d44f9214b0..bdf68678fccc 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> @@ -565,7 +565,7 @@ int register_mtd_blktrans(struct mtd_blktrans_ops *tr)
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	/* Register the notifier if/when the first device type is
> -	   registered, to prevent the link/init ordering from fucking
> +	   registered, to prevent the link/init ordering from hugging
>  	   us over. */

Please rephrase the comment instead of this replacement.

>  	if (!blktrans_notifier.list.next)
>  		register_mtd_user(&blktrans_notifier);

Re: [PATCH RFC 09/15] mtd: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:39:06PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 11:27:18 -0800
> Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c b/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> > index b0d44f9214b0..bdf68678fccc 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c
> > @@ -565,7 +565,7 @@ int register_mtd_blktrans(struct mtd_blktrans_ops *tr)
> >  	int ret;
> >  
> >  	/* Register the notifier if/when the first device type is
> > -	   registered, to prevent the link/init ordering from fucking
> > +	   registered, to prevent the link/init ordering from hugging
> >  	   us over. */
> 
> Please rephrase the comment instead of this replacement.

Will do in the next version of this patch set!

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 09/15] mtd: replace **** with a hug

[Richard Weinberger]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 8:28 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Please explain in detail why the CoC forces us to avoid this word.
Your patch seems more like self-censorship.

-- 
Thanks,
//richard

[PATCH RFC 10/15] net/sunhme: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c
index 863fd602fd33..54a2065f3881 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c
@@ -983,7 +983,7 @@ static void happy_meal_poll_stop(struct happy_meal *hp, void __iomem *tregs)
 	ASD(("done\n"));
 }
 
-/* Only Sun can take such nice parts and fuck up the programming interface
+/* Only Sun can take such nice parts and hug up the programming interface
  * like this.  Good job guys...
  */
 #define TCVR_RESET_TRIES       16 /* It should reset quickly        */
@@ -2075,7 +2075,7 @@ static void happy_meal_rx(struct happy_meal *hp, struct net_device *dev)
 			skb = copy_skb;
 		}
 
-		/* This card is _fucking_ hot... */
+		/* This card is _hugging_ hot... */
 		skb->csum = csum_unfold(~(__force __sum16)htons(csum));
 		skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_COMPLETE;
 
-- 
2.19.1

[PATCH RFC 11/15] scsi: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h b/drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h
index 884ad72ade57..f1785154061c 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h
+++ b/drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
 #define REQUEST_QUEUE_WAKEUP		0x8005
 #define EXECUTION_TIMEOUT_RESET		0x8006
 
-/* Am I fucking pedantic or what? */
+/* Am I hugging pedantic or what? */
 struct Entry_header {
 #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN
 	u8	entry_cnt;
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 11/15] scsi: replace **** with a hug

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 11:27 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h b/drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h
> index 884ad72ade57..f1785154061c 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h
> @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
>  #define REQUEST_QUEUE_WAKEUP		0x8005
>  #define EXECUTION_TIMEOUT_RESET		0x8006
>  
> -/* Am I fucking pedantic or what? */
> +/* Am I hugging pedantic or what? */

I really don't think this is either necessary or a good idea.  The code
of conduct explicitly doesn't require this.  It says:

   Contributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate
   language.
   Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct will not
   be
   addressed now as a violation.

However, I assume you're thinking about the next sentence:

   Inappropriate language can be seen as a bug, though; such bugs will
   be fixed more quickly if any interested parties submit patches to
   that effect.

?

I would interpret the above comment as simply an expression of
frustration directed by the author at some of the endian problems
drivers like this bring.  Since it's not directed at anything other
than hardware I don't think it could be seen as threatening or abusive
or contributing to a negative environment even if submitted today.

For better or for worse, the word "fuck", which was once seen as so
beyond the pale that only loose tongued individuals like monty python
could get away with it (The great John Cleese use of the word fuck at a
funeral [Eric Chapman's] springing immediately to mind), has now moved
into the TV primetime mainstream and it's not our job to try and
reimpose language decency on the world.

James

Re: [PATCH RFC 11/15] scsi: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 12:21:07PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
>    Inappropriate language can be seen as a bug, though; such bugs will
>    be fixed more quickly if any interested parties submit patches to
>    that effect.

Yes, exactly this part.

I can add appropriate fixes tags but for most part they are before
"git epoch" prbly...

/Jarkko

[PATCH RFC 12/15] inotify: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c b/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
index 105576daca4a..db0b3b6d6a58 100644
--- a/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
+++ b/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
@@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static void inotify_remove_from_idr(struct fsnotify_group *group,
 	/*
 	 * We found an mark in the idr at the right wd, but it's
 	 * not the mark we were told to remove.  eparis seriously
-	 * fucked up somewhere.
+	 * hugged up somewhere.
 	 */
 	if (unlikely(found_i_mark != i_mark)) {
 		WARN_ONCE(1, "%s: i_mark=%p i_mark->wd=%d i_mark->group=%p "
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 12/15] inotify: replace **** with a hug

[Amir Goldstein]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 9:27 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c b/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
> index 105576daca4a..db0b3b6d6a58 100644
> --- a/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
> +++ b/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
> @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static void inotify_remove_from_idr(struct fsnotify_group *group,
>         /*
>          * We found an mark in the idr at the right wd, but it's
>          * not the mark we were told to remove.  eparis seriously
> -        * fucked up somewhere.
> +        * hugged up somewhere.
>          */
>         if (unlikely(found_i_mark != i_mark)) {
>                 WARN_ONCE(1, "%s: i_mark=%p i_mark->wd=%d i_mark->group=%p "


LoL. doesn't shaming conflict with the CoC?
Just remove this sentence - it adds no valuable information.
While at it, please fix grammar "a mark".

BTW, maybe you want to teach checkpatch.pl to alert about this
sort of language...

$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl ./0001-test.patch
WARNING: 'refered' may be misspelled - perhaps 'referred'?
#4:
Subject: [PATCH] fucked up refered to person

Thanks,
Amir.

Re: [PATCH RFC 12/15] inotify: replace **** with a hug

[Jan Kara]

On Sat 01-12-18 08:40:25, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 9:27 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c b/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
> > index 105576daca4a..db0b3b6d6a58 100644
> > --- a/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
> > +++ b/fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c
> > @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ static void inotify_remove_from_idr(struct fsnotify_group *group,
> >         /*
> >          * We found an mark in the idr at the right wd, but it's
> >          * not the mark we were told to remove.  eparis seriously
> > -        * fucked up somewhere.
> > +        * hugged up somewhere.
> >          */
> >         if (unlikely(found_i_mark != i_mark)) {
> >                 WARN_ONCE(1, "%s: i_mark=%p i_mark->wd=%d i_mark->group=%p "
> 
> 
> LoL. doesn't shaming conflict with the CoC?
> Just remove this sentence - it adds no valuable information.
> While at it, please fix grammar "a mark".

Agreed, just send a patch to remove that sentence and fixup the article.
Btw, for the fun of it Eric has added this comment himself so I don't think
this would really qualify as a CoC violation ;)

								Honza

-- 
Jan Kara <jack@suse.com>
SUSE Labs, CR

[PATCH RFC 13/15] irq: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 kernel/irq/timings.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/irq/timings.c b/kernel/irq/timings.c
index 1e4cb63a5c82..a15cabe7a5dc 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/timings.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/timings.c
@@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static void irqs_update(struct irqt_stat *irqs, u64 ts)
 
 	/*
 	 * The interval type is u64 in order to deal with the same
-	 * type in our computation, that prevent mindfuck issues with
+	 * type in our computation, that prevent mindhug issues with
 	 * overflow, sign and division.
 	 */
 	interval = ts - old_ts;
-- 
2.19.1

[PATCH RFC 14/15] lib: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 lib/vsprintf.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
index 37a54a6dd594..b7a92f5d47bb 100644
--- a/lib/vsprintf.c
+++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
 
 /* vsprintf.c -- Lars Wirzenius & Linus Torvalds. */
 /*
- * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it up :-)
+ * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds hugged it up :-)
  */
 
 /*
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 14/15] lib: replace **** with a hug

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 11:27:23 -0800
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/vsprintf.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
> index 37a54a6dd594..b7a92f5d47bb 100644
> --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
>  
>  /* vsprintf.c -- Lars Wirzenius & Linus Torvalds. */
>  /*
> - * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it up :-)
> + * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds hugged it up :-)

Since the code has been greatly modified since that comment was added,
I would say the comment is simply out of date.

Just nuke the comment, and that will be an accurate change with or
without CoC.

-- Steve

>   */
>  
>  /*

Re: [PATCH RFC 14/15] lib: replace **** with a hug

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:41:11 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

> > - * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it up :-)
> > + * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds hugged it up :-)  
> 
> Since the code has been greatly modified since that comment was added,
> I would say the comment is simply out of date.
> 
> Just nuke the comment, and that will be an accurate change with or
> without CoC.

For both patches, actually, I'd much rather see either deletion or a
rewrite over bleeping out words that somebody might not like.

jon

Re: [PATCH RFC 14/15] lib: replace **** with a hug

[Jiri Kosina]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Jonathan Corbet wrote:

> > Since the code has been greatly modified since that comment was added,
> > I would say the comment is simply out of date.
> > 
> > Just nuke the comment, and that will be an accurate change with or
> > without CoC.
> 
> For both patches, actually, I'd much rather see either deletion or a
> rewrite over bleeping out words that somebody might not like.

Exactly. Turning comments into something that often doesn't make sense to 
anybody at all is hardly productive.

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs

Re: [PATCH RFC 14/15] lib: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:41:11PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Since the code has been greatly modified since that comment was added,
> I would say the comment is simply out of date.
> 
> Just nuke the comment, and that will be an accurate change with or
> without CoC.

Thanks, will do.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 14/15] lib: replace **** with a hug

[Sergey Senozhatsky]

On (11/30/18 12:59), Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:41:11PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Since the code has been greatly modified since that comment was added,
> > I would say the comment is simply out of date.
> > 
> > Just nuke the comment, and that will be an accurate change with or
> > without CoC.
> 
> Thanks, will do.

Well, nuking the comment is OK.

Could you please help me understand one thing:
  Linus has made a comment; in his own words, about his own
  code. Why would anyone be offended by this?


More importantly, if this is now non-CoC-complaint, will I face
any penalties for
	"Yikes! I'm a moron; my patch broke NMI printk, sorry!"
email?

	-ss

Re: [PATCH RFC 14/15] lib: replace **** with a hug

[Tobin C. Harding]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27:23AM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/vsprintf.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/vsprintf.c b/lib/vsprintf.c
> index 37a54a6dd594..b7a92f5d47bb 100644
> --- a/lib/vsprintf.c
> +++ b/lib/vsprintf.c
> @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@
>  
>  /* vsprintf.c -- Lars Wirzenius & Linus Torvalds. */
>  /*
> - * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it up :-)

This is my favourite comment to date in the kernel source tree.  Surely
there are still some people working on the kernel that do so for fun.  I
actually laughed out loud when I first stumbled upon this file.


	 Tobin
	 

[PATCH RFC 15/15] net: replace **** with a hug

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 net/core/skbuff.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
index a8217e221e19..8aadde6464a7 100644
--- a/net/core/skbuff.c
+++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
@@ -4093,7 +4093,7 @@ int skb_cow_data(struct sk_buff *skb, int tailbits, struct sk_buff **trailer)
 		    skb_has_frag_list(skb1)) {
 			struct sk_buff *skb2;
 
-			/* Fuck, we are miserable poor guys... */
+			/* Hug, we are miserable poor guys... */
 			if (ntail == 0)
 				skb2 = skb_copy(skb1, GFP_ATOMIC);
 			else
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH RFC 15/15] net: replace **** with a hug

[Phil Sutter]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27:24AM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

This is incorrect: The patch doesn't replace '****', but 'fuck' instead.

> -			/* Fuck, we are miserable poor guys... */
> +			/* Hug, we are miserable poor guys... */

I fail to see the benefit from doing that. If I wrote: "Hug you you
hugging hug", you would still find it offensive as long as you know what
"hug" is supposed to translate into. And if you don't, you'll soon find
out.

A more constructive approach to replacing "fuck this and that" than
simply applying 's/fuck/whatever/' would be to provide details what
exactly is so bad about this and that. Of course that's not possible
without considerable effort, unlike your approach which doesn't alter
what is written but merely which words are used for it.

Cheers, Phil

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Kees Cook]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find
"hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we
bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to
follow true Doggo meme style).

"This API is hugged" doesn't make any sense to me. "This API is
hecked" is better, or at least funnier (to me). "Hug this interface"
similarly makes no sense, but "Heck this interface" seems better.
"Don't touch my hecking code", "What the heck were they thinking?"
etc... "hug" is odd.

Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific
changes? "This API is terrible", "Hateful interface", "Don't touch my
freakin' code", "What in the world were they thinking?" etc?

-Kees

>
> Jarkko Sakkinen (15):
>   MIPS: replace **** with a hug
>   Documentation: replace **** with a hug
>   drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug
>   m68k: replace **** with a hug
>   parisc: replace **** with a hug
>   cpufreq: replace **** with a hug
>   ide: replace **** with a hug
>   media: replace **** with a hug
>   mtd: replace **** with a hug
>   net/sunhme: replace **** with a hug
>   scsi: replace **** with a hug
>   inotify: replace **** with a hug
>   irq: replace **** with a hug
>   lib: replace **** with a hug
>   net: replace **** with a hug
>
>  Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst      |  2 +-
>  arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h              |  2 +-
>  arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c                    | 24 +++++++++----------
>  arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c               |  2 +-
>  arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c               |  2 +-
>  drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c                 |  2 +-
>  .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c   |  2 +-
>  .../nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc    |  2 +-
>  drivers/ide/cmd640.c                          |  2 +-
>  drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c                     |  8 ++++---
>  drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c                     |  2 +-
>  drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c             |  4 ++--
>  drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h                      |  2 +-
>  fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c              |  2 +-
>  kernel/irq/timings.c                          |  2 +-
>  lib/vsprintf.c                                |  2 +-
>  net/core/skbuff.c                             |  2 +-
>  17 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.19.1
>


-- 
Kees Cook

Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Kees Cook]

[resend with CCs dropped so it'll actually get delivered to lkml...]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
<jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find
"hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we
bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to
follow true Doggo meme style).

"This API is hugged" doesn't make any sense to me. "This API is
hecked" is better, or at least funnier (to me). "Hug this interface"
similarly makes no sense, but "Heck this interface" seems better.
"Don't touch my hecking code", "What the heck were they thinking?"
etc... "hug" is odd.

Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific
changes? "This API is terrible", "Hateful interface", "Don't touch my
freakin' code", "What in the world were they thinking?" etc?

-Kees

>
> Jarkko Sakkinen (15):
>   MIPS: replace **** with a hug
>   Documentation: replace **** with a hug
>   drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug
>   m68k: replace **** with a hug
>   parisc: replace **** with a hug
>   cpufreq: replace **** with a hug
>   ide: replace **** with a hug
>   media: replace **** with a hug
>   mtd: replace **** with a hug
>   net/sunhme: replace **** with a hug
>   scsi: replace **** with a hug
>   inotify: replace **** with a hug
>   irq: replace **** with a hug
>   lib: replace **** with a hug
>   net: replace **** with a hug
>
>  Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst      |  2 +-
>  arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h              |  2 +-
>  arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c                    | 24 +++++++++----------
>  arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c               |  2 +-
>  arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c               |  2 +-
>  drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c                 |  2 +-
>  .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c   |  2 +-
>  .../nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc    |  2 +-
>  drivers/ide/cmd640.c                          |  2 +-
>  drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c                     |  8 ++++---
>  drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c                     |  2 +-
>  drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c             |  4 ++--
>  drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h                      |  2 +-
>  fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c              |  2 +-
>  kernel/irq/timings.c                          |  2 +-
>  lib/vsprintf.c                                |  2 +-
>  net/core/skbuff.c                             |  2 +-
>  17 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.19.1
>

-- 
Kees Cook

Re: Fwd: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Aaro Koskinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:48:24AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific
> changes? "This API is terrible"

I think we should only use "good" with selected operators like !, ++, --

E.g. "This API is !good++"

Suggested-by: George Orwell

A.

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Davidlohr Bueso]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:

>On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
><jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.

I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
technical comments? This is all beyond me...

Thanks,
Davidlohr

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jens Axboe]

On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
>> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
> technical comments? This is all beyond me...

Agree, this is insanity.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Michael Schmitz]

Am 01.12.2018 um 09:12 schrieb Jens Axboe:
> On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
>>> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
>>
>> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
>> technical comments? This is all beyond me...
>
> Agree, this is insanity.

Irony? Parody?

That's what crossed my mind, to be brutally honest. Group hug, anyone?

For the VME vectors case: no need to hug, just don't mess with them.

Cheers,

	Michael

(Waiting for Adrian's ticket machines to swoop down and take me out now 
... in 24 hours ...)

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[David Miller]

From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:12:26 -0700

> On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
>>> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
>> 
>> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
>> technical comments? This is all beyond me...
> 
> Agree, this is insanity.

And even worse it is censorship.

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[David Miller]

From: Abuse <abuse@2.abuse.bgcomp.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:39:01 +0000

> I assume I will now be barred.

Perhaps, but not because you said fuck.  It would be because you're
intentionally creating a disturbance on the list and making it more
difficult for developers to get their work done and intentionally
creating a distraction and a hostile environment for the discussion at
hand.

That would not be censorship.

There is a big difference.

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Steven Rostedt]

[ Cleared out the Cc list to something more reasonable ]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:45:57 +0000
Abuse <abuse@2.abuse.bgcomp.co.uk> wrote:

> On Friday, 30 November 2018 20:42:28 GMT David Miller wrote:
> > From: Abuse <abuse@2.abuse.bgcomp.co.uk>
> > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:39:01 +0000
> >   
> > > I assume I will now be barred.  
> > 
> > Perhaps, but not because you said fuck.  It would be because you're
> > intentionally creating a disturbance on the list and making it more
> > difficult for developers to get their work done and intentionally
> > creating a distraction and a hostile environment for the discussion at
> > hand.
> > 
> > That would not be censorship.
> > 
> > There is a big difference.
> >   
> 
> I would beg to differ, as would calling the removal of the word 'Fuck' censorship.

Technically that is censorship. The only reason to remove the word is
because some people find it unnecessary, where as other people find it
appropriate.

Removing language people find unnecessary or offensive is censorship.

That said. I don't always find censorship a bad thing. Removing
language that was an attack to someone's race, religion, sexuality, is
also censorship. But I'm fine with that kind of censorship. Censoring
words that someone simply finds distasteful, I honestly don't really
care, because some people find "heck" distasteful too.

I would also agree with you that David blocking you for creating a
disturbance is also censorship. But that's also a kind of censorship I
would prefer to have. (Blocking spam is censorship too).

-- Steve


> 
> It's a word I find is totally unnecessary in normal public usage.
> 

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 20:39:01 +0000
Abuse <abuse@2.abuse.bgcomp.co.uk> wrote:

> On Friday, 30 November 2018 20:35:07 GMT David Miller wrote:
> > From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:12:26 -0700
> >   
> > > On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:  
> > >> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> > >>   
> > >>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> > >>> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:  
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.  
> > >> 
> > >> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
> > >> technical comments? This is all beyond me...  
> > > 
> > > Agree, this is insanity.  
> > 
> > And even worse it is censorship.
> >   
> 
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> Hug
> 
> I assume I will now be barred.
> 

-- Steve

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:39:01PM +0000, Abuse wrote:
> On Friday, 30 November 2018 20:35:07 GMT David Miller wrote:
> > From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:12:26 -0700
> > 
> > > On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> > >> 
> > >>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> > >>> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> > >> 
> > >> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
> > >> technical comments? This is all beyond me...
> > > 
> > > Agree, this is insanity.
> > 
> > And even worse it is censorship.
> > 
> 
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> Fuck
> 
> I assume I will now be barred.
> 
> 

Thank you for taking the opportunity to practice free speech in the
always so welcoming and inclusive on-line world :-) Now I'll just have
to find my notebook and write this prose down so that I'll never forget
it. Thanks again.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 12:35:07PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:12:26 -0700
> 
> > On 11/30/18 12:56 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> >>> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> >> 
> >> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
> >> technical comments? This is all beyond me...
> > 
> > Agree, this is insanity.
> 
> And even worse it is censorship.

It is not close to a cencorship, especially when I used RFC tag, which
essentially says that I'm not saying "please take this", right?

Can you tell how the CoC should be interpreted then? I read it through
on my plane trip with an eye glass.

Is cursing OK?

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[David Miller]

From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:42:33 -0800

> Can you tell how the CoC should be interpreted then?

Regardless of what I think, as others have showen the CoC explicitly
does not apply to existing code.

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jens Axboe]

On 11/30/18 2:47 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:42:33 -0800
> 
>> Can you tell how the CoC should be interpreted then?
> 
> Regardless of what I think, as others have showen the CoC explicitly
> does not apply to existing code.

And with that, can we please put an end to this thread (and patchset)?

-- 
Jens Axboe

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[David Miller]

From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 11:56:52 -0800

> I hope this is some kind of joke.

Whether or not it is a joke, it is censorship.

And because of that I have no intention to apply any patches like this
to any code I am in charge of.

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:56:52AM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> > <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
> technical comments? This is all beyond me...

Well... Not a joke really but more like conversation starter :-)

I had 10h flight from Amsterdam to Portland and one of the things that I
did was to read the new CoC properly.

This a direct quote from the CoC:

"Harassment includes the use of abusive, offensive or degrading
language, intimidation, stalking, harassing photography or recording,
inappropriate physical contact, sexual imagery and unwelcome sexual
advances or requests for sexual favors."

Doesn't this fall into this category?

Your argument is not that great because you could say that from any LKML
discussion. If you don't like hugging, please propose something else :-)

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 12:55 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:56:52AM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> > > <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> > 
> > I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by
> > reading technical comments? This is all beyond me...
> 
> Well... Not a joke really but more like conversation starter :-)
> 
> I had 10h flight from Amsterdam to Portland and one of the things
> that I did was to read the new CoC properly.
> 
> This a direct quote from the CoC:
> 
> "Harassment includes the use of abusive, offensive or degrading
> language, intimidation, stalking, harassing photography or recording,
> inappropriate physical contact, sexual imagery and unwelcome sexual
> advances or requests for sexual favors."
> 
> Doesn't this fall into this category?

No because use of what some people consider to be bad language isn't
necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading.  Our most heavily censored
medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered acceptable in certain
contexts on most channels in the UK and EU.

> Your argument is not that great because you could say that from any
> LKML discussion. If you don't like hugging, please propose something
> else
> :-)

The interpretation document also says this:

   ontributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate
   language. Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct
   will not be addressed now as a violation.

So that definitely means there should be no hunting down of existing
comments in kernel code.

James

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:01:02PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> No because use of what some people consider to be bad language isn't
> necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading.  Our most heavily censored
> medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered acceptable in certain
> contexts on most channels in the UK and EU.

This makes following the CoC extremely hard to a non-native speaker as
it is not too explicit on what is OK and what is not. I did through the
whole thing with an eye glass and this what I deduced from it.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[David Miller]

From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:44:05 -0800

> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:01:02PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
>> No because use of what some people consider to be bad language isn't
>> necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading.  Our most heavily censored
>> medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered acceptable in certain
>> contexts on most channels in the UK and EU.
> 
> This makes following the CoC extremely hard to a non-native speaker as
> it is not too explicit on what is OK and what is not. I did through the
> whole thing with an eye glass and this what I deduced from it.

It would be helpful if you could explain what part of the language
is unclear wrt. explaining how CoC does not apply to existing code.

That part seems very explicit to me.

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:48:08PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:44:05 -0800
> 
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:01:02PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> >> No because use of what some people consider to be bad language isn't
> >> necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading.  Our most heavily censored
> >> medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered acceptable in certain
> >> contexts on most channels in the UK and EU.
> > 
> > This makes following the CoC extremely hard to a non-native speaker as
> > it is not too explicit on what is OK and what is not. I did through the
> > whole thing with an eye glass and this what I deduced from it.
> 
> It would be helpful if you could explain what part of the language
> is unclear wrt. explaining how CoC does not apply to existing code.
> 
> That part seems very explicit to me.

Well, now that I re-read it, it was this part to be exact:

"Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other
contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban
temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they
deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful."

How this should be interpreted?

I have not really followed the previous CoC discussions as I try to
always use polite language so I'm sorry if this duplicate.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 13:54 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:48:08PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 13:44:05 -0800
> > 
> > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:01:02PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > > No because use of what some people consider to be bad language
> > > > isn't
> > > > necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading.  Our most heavily
> > > > censored
> > > > medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered acceptable in certain
> > > > contexts on most channels in the UK and EU.
> > > 
> > > This makes following the CoC extremely hard to a non-native
> > > speaker as
> > > it is not too explicit on what is OK and what is not. I did
> > > through the
> > > whole thing with an eye glass and this what I deduced from it.
> > 
> > It would be helpful if you could explain what part of the language
> > is unclear wrt. explaining how CoC does not apply to existing code.
> > 
> > That part seems very explicit to me.
> 
> Well, now that I re-read it, it was this part to be exact:
> 
> "Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
> reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other
> contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban
> temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that
> they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful."
> 
> How this should be interpreted?

Firstly, this is *only* about contributions going forward.  The
interpretation document says we don't have to look back into the
repository and we definitely can't remove something from git that's
already been committed.

As a Maintainer, if you feel bad language is inappropriate for your
subsystem then you say so and reject with that reason patches that come
in containing it (suggesting alternative rewordings).  However, your
determination about what is or isn't acceptable in your subsystem isn't
binding on other maintainers, who may have different standards ... this
is identical to what we do with coding, like your insistence on one
line per variable or other subsystem's insistence on reverse christmas
tree for includes ...

James


> I have not really followed the previous CoC discussions as I try to
> always use polite language so I'm sorry if this duplicate.
> 
> /Jarkko
> 

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 13:44 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:01:02PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> > No because use of what some people consider to be bad language
> > isn't necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading.  Our most
> > heavily censored medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered
> > acceptable in certain contexts on most channels in the UK and EU.
> 
> This makes following the CoC extremely hard to a non-native speaker
> as it is not too explicit on what is OK and what is not. I did
> through the whole thing with an eye glass and this what I deduced
> from it.

OK, so something that would simply be considered in some quarters as
bad language isn't explicitly banned.  The thing which differentiates
simple bad language from "abusive, offensive or degrading language",
which is called out by the CoC, is the context and the target.

So when it's a simple expletive or the code of the author or even the
hardware is the target, I'd say it's an easy determination it's not a
CoC violation.  If someone else's code is the target or the inventor of
the hardware is targetted by name, I'd say it is.  Even non-native
English speakers should be able to determine target and context,
because that's the essence of meaning.

James

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:57:49PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 13:44 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 01:01:02PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > No because use of what some people consider to be bad language
> > > isn't necessarily abusive, offensive or degrading.  Our most
> > > heavily censored medium is TV and "fuck" is now considered
> > > acceptable in certain contexts on most channels in the UK and EU.
> > 
> > This makes following the CoC extremely hard to a non-native speaker
> > as it is not too explicit on what is OK and what is not. I did
> > through the whole thing with an eye glass and this what I deduced
> > from it.
> 
> OK, so something that would simply be considered in some quarters as
> bad language isn't explicitly banned.  The thing which differentiates
> simple bad language from "abusive, offensive or degrading language",
> which is called out by the CoC, is the context and the target.
> 
> So when it's a simple expletive or the code of the author or even the
> hardware is the target, I'd say it's an easy determination it's not a
> CoC violation.  If someone else's code is the target or the inventor of
> the hardware is targetted by name, I'd say it is.  Even non-native
> English speakers should be able to determine target and context,
> because that's the essence of meaning.

I pasted this already to another response and this was probably the part
that ignited me to send the patch set (was a few days ago, so had to
revisit to find the exact paragraph):

"Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other
contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban
temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that they
deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful."

The whole patch set is neither a joke/troll nor something I would
necessarily want to be include myself. It does have the RFC tag.

As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from
other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what
the responsibility part here means.

I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for
existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm.

Is this wrong interpretation?  Should I conclude that I made a mistake
by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says?
After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from
> other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what
> the responsibility part here means.
> 
> I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for
> existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm.
> 
> Is this wrong interpretation?  Should I conclude that I made a mistake
> by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says?
> After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before.

Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst?
As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should
be interpreted here.

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800
> Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from
> > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what
> > the responsibility part here means.
> > 
> > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for
> > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm.
> > 
> > Is this wrong interpretation?  Should I conclude that I made a mistake
> > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says?
> > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before.
> 
> Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst?
> As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should
> be interpreted here.

Ugh, was not aware that there two documents.

Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged to
single common sense code of conduct?

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:26:05PM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800
> > Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from
> > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what
> > > the responsibility part here means.
> > > 
> > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for
> > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm.
> > > 
> > > Is this wrong interpretation?  Should I conclude that I made a mistake
> > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says?
> > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before.
> > 
> > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst?
> > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should
> > be interpreted here.
> 
> Ugh, was not aware that there two documents.
> 
> Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged to
> single common sense code of conduct?

I.e. if the latter that you pointed out tells you what you actually
should do what value does the former bring?

Just looked up archives and realized that there has been whole alot
of CoC related discussions. No wonder this is seen as waste of time.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 14:26 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
[...]
> > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-
> > interpretation.rst? 
> > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things
> > should be interpreted here.
> 
> Ugh, was not aware that there two documents.
> 
> Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged
> to single common sense code of conduct?

The fact that we've arrived at essentially an original CoC
reinterpreted to the point where it's effectively a new CoC has been
the source of much debate and recrimination over the last few months
... you can read it in the ksummit-discuss archives, but I really think
we don't want to reopen that can of worms.

James

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:30:45PM -0800, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 14:26 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 03:14:59PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> [...]
> > > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-
> > > interpretation.rst? 
> > > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things
> > > should be interpreted here.
> > 
> > Ugh, was not aware that there two documents.
> > 
> > Yeah, definitely sheds light. Why the documents could not be merged
> > to single common sense code of conduct?
> 
> The fact that we've arrived at essentially an original CoC
> reinterpreted to the point where it's effectively a new CoC has been
> the source of much debate and recrimination over the last few months
> ... you can read it in the ksummit-discuss archives, but I really think
> we don't want to reopen that can of worms.

Got you... Well I now read the 2nd amendment now through, and yeah, kind
of way I work/function anyway.

Thank you for the patience...

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 02:40:19PM -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> Got you... Well I now read the 2nd amendment now through, and yeah, kind
> of way I work/function anyway.

Ugh, looked up the word from dictionary for something that makes
additions to some guidelines because did not know the english word.
Not meant as a political reference of any kind. Just don't know
any better English word.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Jon,

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:15 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800
> Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from
> > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what
> > the responsibility part here means.
> >
> > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for
> > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm.
> >
> > Is this wrong interpretation?  Should I conclude that I made a mistake
> > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says?
> > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before.
>
> Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst?
> As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should
> be interpreted here.

Indeed:

| Contributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate language.
| Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct will not be
| addressed now as a violation.

However:

| Inappropriate language can be seen as a
| bug, though; such bugs will be fixed more quickly if any interested
| parties submit patches to that effect.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Eric Curtin]

Hi Guys,

I initially thought these patches were a joke. But I guess they are
not. I suppose 2018 is the year everything became offensive.

Could we avoid the s/fuck/hug/g though? I have nothing against
re-wording this stuff to remove the curse word, but it should at least
make sense.

What's going to happen is someone is a newbie is going to see a comment
like "We found an mark in the idr at the right wd, but it's not the
mark we were told to remove. eparis seriously hugged up somewhere",
probably google the term as they are unfamiliar with it, find out it's
an alias for "fucked" and if they are sensitive get offended anyway.

On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 08:20, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Jon,
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:15 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 14:12:19 -0800
> > Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from
> > > other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows what
> > > the responsibility part here means.
> > >
> > > I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even for
> > > existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm.
> > >
> > > Is this wrong interpretation?  Should I conclude that I made a mistake
> > > by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it *actually* says?
> > > After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than before.
> >
> > Have you read Documentation/process/code-of-conduct-interpretation.rst?
> > As has been pointed out, it contains a clear answer to how things should
> > be interpreted here.
>
> Indeed:
>
> | Contributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate language.
> | Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct will not be
> | addressed now as a violation.
>
> However:
>
> | Inappropriate language can be seen as a
> | bug, though; such bugs will be fixed more quickly if any interested
> | parties submit patches to that effect.
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                         Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
>                                 -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[James Bottomley]

On Fri, 2018-11-30 at 14:12 -0800, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
[...]
> I pasted this already to another response and this was probably the
> part that ignited me to send the patch set (was a few days ago, so
> had to revisit to find the exact paragraph):

I replied in to the other thread.

> "Maintainers have the right and responsibility to remove, edit, or
> reject comments, commits, code, wiki edits, issues, and other
> contributions that are not aligned to this Code of Conduct, or to ban
> temporarily or permanently any contributor for other behaviors that
> they deem inappropriate, threatening, offensive, or harmful."
> 
> The whole patch set is neither a joke/troll nor something I would
> necessarily want to be include myself. It does have the RFC tag.
> 
> As a maintainer myself (and based on somewhat disturbed feedback from
> other maintainers) I can only make the conclusion that nobody knows
> what the responsibility part here means.
> 
> I would interpret, if I read it like at lawyer at least, that even
> for existing code you would need to do the changes postmorterm.

That's wrong in the light of the interpretation document, yes.

> Is this wrong interpretation?  Should I conclude that I made a
> mistake by reading the CoC and trying to understand what it
> *actually* says?

You can't read it in isolation, you need to read it along with the
interpretation document.  The latter was created precisely because
there was a lot of push back on interpretation problems and ambiguities
with the original CoC and it specifically covers this case (and a lot
of others).

James


> After this discussion, I can say that I understand it less than
> before.
> 
> /Jarkko
> 

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 12:55:21 -0800
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:56:52AM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018, Kees Cook wrote:
> >   
> > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> > > <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > 
> > > > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.  
> > 
> > I hope this is some kind of joke. How would anyone get offended by reading
> > technical comments? This is all beyond me...  
> 
> Well... Not a joke really but more like conversation starter :-)
> 
> I had 10h flight from Amsterdam to Portland and one of the things that I
> did was to read the new CoC properly.
> 
> This a direct quote from the CoC:
> 
> "Harassment includes the use of abusive, offensive or degrading
> language, intimidation, stalking, harassing photography or recording,
> inappropriate physical contact, sexual imagery and unwelcome sexual
> advances or requests for sexual favors."
> 
> Doesn't this fall into this category?
>

It has also been discussed that existing code (and past conduct) will
not be covered under the CoC. It's about new code and conduct moving
forward.

-- Steve

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 12:55:21 -0800
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> This a direct quote from the CoC:
> 
> "Harassment includes the use of abusive, offensive or degrading
> language, intimidation, stalking, harassing photography or recording,
> inappropriate physical contact, sexual imagery and unwelcome sexual
> advances or requests for sexual favors."

...and this is from the interpretation document:

> Contributions submitted for the kernel should use appropriate language.
> Content that already exists predating the Code of Conduct will not be
> addressed now as a violation.

So existing code is explicitly not a CoC violation and need not be
treated as such.  That said, improvements to the comments are always
welcome, as long as they are actually improvements.

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

(reducing CC, as per later advice)

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 8:40 PM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
>
> Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find
> "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we
> bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to
> follow true Doggo meme style).
>
> "This API is hugged" doesn't make any sense to me. "This API is
> hecked" is better, or at least funnier (to me). "Hug this interface"
> similarly makes no sense, but "Heck this interface" seems better.
> "Don't touch my hecking code", "What the heck were they thinking?"
> etc... "hug" is odd.

As a non-native speaker, I find both replacements difficult to understand.
While many of the original comments are easy to grasp for +7 year olds
who were never taught English, but are exposed to modern global ways
of communication...

> Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific
> changes? "This API is terrible", "Hateful interface", "Don't touch my
> freakin' code", "What in the world were they thinking?" etc?

The last one is not appropriate, as it's shooting at the person, not at the
code (cfr. "You did a bad thing" vs. "you're a bad kid").

If the comments no longer apply, it's better to remove them.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 08:57:09PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> As a non-native speaker, I find both replacements difficult to understand.
> While many of the original comments are easy to grasp for +7 year olds
> who were never taught English, but are exposed to modern global ways
> of communication...

So you say that a non-native speaker could drop the f-word by accident?
Like when you go to a grocery store in an English speaking country,
instead of saying hello to the counter lady, you say the f-word by
accident? Does not compute...

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[John Paul Adrian Glaubitz]

On 11/30/18 8:40 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific
> changes? "This API is terrible", "Hateful interface", "Don't touch my
> freakin' code", "What in the world were they thinking?" etc?
Or just leave it as is because we're all grown up and don't freak out
when a piece of text contains the word "fuck".

I still don't understand why people think that the word "fuck" is what
would keep certain groups from contributing to the Linux kernel. In all
seriousness, it doesn't.

Adrian

-- 
 .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
: :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
`. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
  `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:09:48PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Or just leave it as is because we're all grown up and don't freak out
> when a piece of text contains the word "fuck".
> 
> I still don't understand why people think that the word "fuck" is what
> would keep certain groups from contributing to the Linux kernel. In all
> seriousness, it doesn't.

Are you making a claim that your personal experience, and maybe your
mates, is the objective truth, or am I misunderstanding something?

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Matthias Brugger]

On 30/11/2018 20:40, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find
> "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we
> bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to
> follow true Doggo meme style).
> 
> "This API is hugged" doesn't make any sense to me. "This API is
> hecked" is better, or at least funnier (to me). "Hug this interface"
> similarly makes no sense, but "Heck this interface" seems better.
> "Don't touch my hecking code", "What the heck were they thinking?"
> etc... "hug" is odd.
> 

Like John I don't think that the word "fuck" is something we have to ban from
the source code, but I don't care too much. Anyway, please don't change it to
something like heck as it might be difficult for non-english speaker to understand.

Regards,
Matthias

> Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific
> changes? "This API is terrible", "Hateful interface", "Don't touch my
> freakin' code", "What in the world were they thinking?" etc?
> 
> -Kees
> 
>>
>> Jarkko Sakkinen (15):
>>   MIPS: replace **** with a hug
>>   Documentation: replace **** with a hug
>>   drm/nouveau: replace **** with a hug
>>   m68k: replace **** with a hug
>>   parisc: replace **** with a hug
>>   cpufreq: replace **** with a hug
>>   ide: replace **** with a hug
>>   media: replace **** with a hug
>>   mtd: replace **** with a hug
>>   net/sunhme: replace **** with a hug
>>   scsi: replace **** with a hug
>>   inotify: replace **** with a hug
>>   irq: replace **** with a hug
>>   lib: replace **** with a hug
>>   net: replace **** with a hug
>>
>>  Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst      |  2 +-
>>  arch/m68k/include/asm/sun3ints.h              |  2 +-
>>  arch/mips/pci/ops-bridge.c                    | 24 +++++++++----------
>>  arch/mips/sgi-ip22/ip22-setup.c               |  2 +-
>>  arch/parisc/kernel/sys_parisc.c               |  2 +-
>>  drivers/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c                 |  2 +-
>>  .../gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c   |  2 +-
>>  .../nouveau/nvkm/subdev/pmu/fuc/macros.fuc    |  2 +-
>>  drivers/ide/cmd640.c                          |  2 +-
>>  drivers/media/i2c/bt819.c                     |  8 ++++---
>>  drivers/mtd/mtd_blkdevs.c                     |  2 +-
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/sun/sunhme.c             |  4 ++--
>>  drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h                      |  2 +-
>>  fs/notify/inotify/inotify_user.c              |  2 +-
>>  kernel/irq/timings.c                          |  2 +-
>>  lib/vsprintf.c                                |  2 +-
>>  net/core/skbuff.c                             |  2 +-
>>  17 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>>
>> --
>> 2.19.1
>>
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 09:31:13PM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> Like John I don't think that the word "fuck" is something we have to ban from
> the source code, but I don't care too much. Anyway, please don't change it to
> something like heck as it might be difficult for non-english speaker to understand.

I make context sensitive better thought updates based on the feedback
that Kees gave. I used RFC tag for a reason.

/Jarkko

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/15] Zero ****s, hugload of hugs <3

[Jarkko Sakkinen]

On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:40:17AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 11:27 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > In order to comply with the CoC, replace **** with a hug.
> 
> Heh. I support the replacement of the stronger language, but I find
> "hug", "hugged", and "hugging" to be very weird replacements. Can we
> bikeshed this to "heck", "hecked", and "hecking" (or "heckin" to
> follow true Doggo meme style).
> 
> "This API is hugged" doesn't make any sense to me. "This API is
> hecked" is better, or at least funnier (to me). "Hug this interface"
> similarly makes no sense, but "Heck this interface" seems better.
> "Don't touch my hecking code", "What the heck were they thinking?"
> etc... "hug" is odd.
> 
> Better yet, since it's only 17 files, how about doing context-specific
> changes? "This API is terrible", "Hateful interface", "Don't touch my
> freakin' code", "What in the world were they thinking?" etc?

I'm happy to refine this (thus the RFC tag)! And depending on the
culture, hugging could fall in the harrasment category. Actually, when I
think about it, in Finland this kind of poking of ones personal bubble
would be such :-)

I'll refine the patch set with more context sensitive replacements,
perhaps removing the comment altogether in some places. Thank you for
the feedback!

/Jarkko