From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE939C433DF for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 18:01:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EDC922582 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 18:01:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="EZLNu0og" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729016AbgGNSBX (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2020 14:01:23 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:22335 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728358AbgGNSBX (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2020 14:01:23 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594749682; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=6wTiDYzSRRjWEKEHqhDWlOlrN2pjSMlUd39mDOu9uEM=; b=EZLNu0ogRdtpLzOxlzDI169QrXnVunVdKC1pRUcKEjNA+eqcphTw7xD1egLut/gSE3++2d Q5ijpyeBwV/sVrMircKFU/HkkhVVUROdt8tHzQ/KANPv98Z9RQPo98zlCTiYz6Lv48Nl4j gxT2sZkxAaiuwJBAdGCbO4Mncnmip9Q= Received: from mail-ot1-f70.google.com (mail-ot1-f70.google.com [209.85.210.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-12-L8SC0y6IM7-7wzm9-l4ESA-1; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 14:01:19 -0400 X-MC-Unique: L8SC0y6IM7-7wzm9-l4ESA-1 Received: by mail-ot1-f70.google.com with SMTP id p3so10095257ota.0 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:01:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6wTiDYzSRRjWEKEHqhDWlOlrN2pjSMlUd39mDOu9uEM=; b=PUqs/Y8cHqeJgtSNXetirL1Z/JVkSwfyrBimG7OmGgVDzU5AlO5vJIjNCNAhmTCD0b QUupSjwjdL1bKCH6AQXGhp8LQoaDftMamdGCt62HhIxqwatb7PUMD90hm8mRPtBCruuN pTgn/EZ0xiXVxdvhC+GRkxKz3Ozg/0RElZQxgkCLsRWRuWFjQR3pV9aKoNz9CV38NMCz 5uQpnymbThF1m5PezLtuJJHIpZ/mF7Ibs0rTuMYR0bhOlBo2cCsRJcNmEvk70rWk/Asm mdwdU3ozSqAP8e2sl/Cup28dlP8eyDNjm24dyR1SE94M+BG0j/DDYnelL7e1NH5H8oVZ aXGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533hJIQWuk+QoavqcSOQqX6n4doR1KVpbhaldCYPrSNVy8R7M1mi sH5VOYye/YNinBhBZnU4a2wdBwR0jDFCsCT8JpqKvgyk/yyvLIDKWMPl11z2YDm1R0rT+/Q60/Q /EZZuiPqh+tPyu9kDfnLv4330GLTuf3rb X-Received: by 2002:aca:ecc7:: with SMTP id k190mr4527058oih.92.1594749678615; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:01:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw1r9zZ+XRJlNEp4AH4PLmJ6heTMgpJeMdvPxAeGmj/PDXhWw26bpYDtePSaUSvskgs7H1f2ZDO9uJK/UVF35c= X-Received: by 2002:aca:ecc7:: with SMTP id k190mr4527024oih.92.1594749678198; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:01:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7fb02008-e469-38b7-735b-6bfb8beab414@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7fb02008-e469-38b7-735b-6bfb8beab414@gmail.com> From: Jarod Wilson Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 14:01:07 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] bonding driver terminology change proposal To: Eric Dumazet Cc: Netdev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 5:36 PM Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On 7/13/20 11:51 AM, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > As part of an effort to help enact social change, Red Hat is > > committing to efforts to eliminate any problematic terminology from > > any of the software that it ships and supports. Front and center for > > me personally in that effort is the bonding driver's use of the terms > > master and slave, and to a lesser extent, bond and bonding, due to > > bondage being another term for slavery. Most people in computer > > science understand these terms aren't intended to be offensive or > > oppressive, and have well understood meanings in computing, but > > nonetheless, they still present an open wound, and a barrier for > > participation and inclusion to some. > > > > To start out with, I'd like to attempt to eliminate as much of the use > > of master and slave in the bonding driver as possible. For the most > > part, I think this can be done without breaking UAPI, but may require > > changes to anything accessing bond info via proc or sysfs. > > > > My initial thought was to rename master to aggregator and slaves to > > ports, but... that gets really messy with the existing 802.3ad bonding > > code using both extensively already. I've given thought to a number of > > other possible combinations, but the one that I'm liking the most is > > master -> bundle and slave -> cable, for a number of reasons. I'd > > considered cable and wire, as a cable is a grouping of individual > > wires, but we're grouping together cables, really -- each bonded > > ethernet interface has a cable connected, so a bundle of cables makes > > sense visually and figuratively. Additionally, it's a swap made easier > > in the codebase by master and bundle and slave and cable having the > > same number of characters, respectively. Granted though, "bundle" > > doesn't suggest "runs the show" the way "master" or something like > > maybe "director" or "parent" does, but those lack the visual aspect > > present with a bundle of cables. Using parent/child could work too > > though, it's perhaps closer to the master/slave terminology currently > > in use as far as literal meaning. > > > > So... Thoughts? > > > > So you considered : aggregator/ports, bundle/cable. > > I thought about cord/strand, since this is less likely to be used already in networking land > (like worker, thread, fiber, or wire ...) > > Although a cord with two strands is probably not very common :/ I'd also thought about cable and wire, since there are multiple physical wires inside an ethernet cable, but you typically connect one cable per port, so a bundle of cables seemed to make more sense. :) I also had a few other ideas I played with, including a bundle of pipes and a pipework of pipes (which is apparently a thing, but not very common either, outside of maybe plumbers?). -- Jarod Wilson jarod@redhat.com