Re: [PATCH] include/hw/xen: Use more inclusive language in comment

[David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 2023-11-10 at 10:30 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 09.11.2023 18:40, Thomas Huth wrote:
> > --- a/include/hw/xen/interface/hvm/params.h
> > +++ b/include/hw/xen/interface/hvm/params.h
> > @@ -255,7 +255,7 @@
> >   * Note that 'mixed' mode has not been evaluated for safety from a
> >   * security perspective.  Before using this mode in a
> >   * security-critical environment, each subop should be evaluated for
> > - * safety, with unsafe subops blacklisted in XSM.
> > + * safety, with unsafe subops blocked in XSM.
> 
> To avoid another round trip when you send the patch against xen.git, as
> already asked for by others, I'd like to point out that the wording
> change isn't describing things sufficiently similarly: "blocked" reads
> as if XSM would do so all by itself, whereas "blacklisted" has an
> indication that something needs to be done for XSM to behave in the
> intended way. Minimally I'd suggest "suitably blocked via", but perhaps
> yet better wording can be thought of.

"denylist" is often used and works as a suitable replacement in most
use cases.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature