Re: [PATCH man-pages 2/4] madvise.2: document reliable probe for advice support

["Zach O'Keefe" <zokeefe@google.com>]

Hey Alex,

> > diff --git a/man2/madvise.2 b/man2/madvise.2
> > index e14e0f7fb..adfe24c24 100644
> > --- a/man2/madvise.2
> > +++ b/man2/madvise.2
> > @@ -789,6 +789,13 @@ that are not mapped, the Linux version of
> >   ignores them and applies the call to the rest (but returns
> >   .B ENOMEM
> >   from the system call, as it should).
> > +.PP
> > +.BR madvise (0,
> > +0,
> > +.IR advice )
>
> For expressions, we don't follow the same highlighting rules as in
> identifiers and man-page references.  Instead we use all italics.  See
> man-pages(7):
>
>         Expressions, if not written on a separate indented  line,
>         should  be  specified in italics.  Again, the use of non‐
>         breaking spaces may be appropriate if the  expression  is
>         inlined with normal text.

Just to confirm, by "expression", you mean "madvise(0, 0, advice)"? If
so, to be consistent with the other note, perhaps best to break this
into a phrase such as:

--8<---
.BR madvise ()
called with zero for both
.IR addr
and
.IR length
will return zero iff
.I advice
is supported by the kernel and can be relied on to probe for support.
--8<---

Thanks,
Zach