[RFC PATCH 0/3] alsa-lib/ASoC: use inclusive language for bclk/fsync/topology

[Pierre-Louis Bossart]

On 9/3/20 3:42 PM, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> Dne 03. 09. 20 v 22:10 Pierre-Louis Bossart napsal(a):
>> The SOF (Sound Open Firmware) tree contains a lot of references in
>> topology files to 'codec_slave'/'codec_master' terms, which in turn
>> come from alsa-lib and ALSA/ASoC topology support at the kernel
>> level. These terms are no longer compatible with the guidelines
>> adopted by the kernel community [1] and need to change in
>> backwards-compatible ways.
>>
>> The main/secondary terms typically suggested in guidelines don't mean
>> anything for clocks, this patchset suggests instead the use of
>> 'provider' and 'follower' terms, with the 'codec' prefix kept to make
>> it clear that the codec is the reference. The CM/CF suffixes are also
>> replaced by CP/CF.
> 
> Only my 2 cents: It's just another word combo. See bellow for sources for others.
> 
> I would prefer probably provider/consumer . It sounds more technic.

Thanks Jaroslav for chiming in. I had a similar set of comments in 
internal reviews, but we didn't really have any consensus and I have not 
seen good guidance specifically for clocks.

Provider/consumer is typically used for discrete data exchange with some 
sort of locking and buffer fullness metric, but for clocks we'd want 
something that hints at one device following the timing defined by another.

"follow" or "track" seem clearer than 'consume' IMHO, but I will side 
with the majority, this is an RFC which can be modified at will.