Hello Suren, On 1/28/21 7:40 PM, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 4:24 AM Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) > <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hello Suren, >> >> Thank you for writing this page! Some comments below. > > Thanks for the review! > Couple questions below and I'll respin the new version once they are clarified. Okay. See below. >> On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 at 21:36, Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> [...] Thanks for all the acks. That let's me know that you saw what I said. >>> RETURN VALUE >>> On success, process_madvise() returns the number of bytes advised. This >>> return value may be less than the total number of requested bytes, if an >>> error occurred. The caller should check return value to determine whether >>> a partial advice occurred. >> >> So there are three return values possible, > > Ok, I think I see your point. How about this instead: Well, I'm glad you saw it, because I forgot to finish it. But yes, you understood what I forgot to say. > RETURN VALUE > On success, process_madvise() returns the number of bytes advised. This > return value may be less than the total number of requested bytes, if an > error occurred after some iovec elements were already processed. The caller > should check the return value to determine whether a partial > advice occurred. > > On error, -1 is returned and errno is set appropriately. We recently standardized some wording here: s/appropriately/to indicate the error/. >>> +.PP >>> +The pointer >>> +.I iovec >>> +points to an array of iovec structures, defined in >> >> "iovec" should be formatted as >> >> .I iovec > > I think it is formatted that way above. What am I missing? But also in "an array of iovec structures"... > BTW, where should I be using .I vs .IR? I was looking for an answer > but could not find it. .B / .I == bold/italic this line .BR / .IR == alternate bold/italic with normal (Roman) font. So: .I iovec .I iovec , # so that comma is not italic .BR process_madvise () etc. [...] >>> +.I iovec >>> +if one of its elements points to an invalid memory >>> +region in the remote process. No further elements will be >>> +processed beyond that point. >>> +.PP >>> +Permission to provide a hint to external process is governed by a >>> +ptrace access mode >>> +.B PTRACE_MODE_READ_REALCREDS >>> +check; see >>> +.BR ptrace (2) >>> +and >>> +.B CAP_SYS_ADMIN >>> +capability that caller should have in order to affect performance >>> +of an external process. >> >> The preceding sentence is garbled. Missing words? > > Maybe I worded it incorrectly. What I need to say here is that the > caller should have both PTRACE_MODE_READ_REALCREDS credentials and > CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability. The first part I shamelessly copy/pasted > from https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/process_vm_readv.2.html and > tried adding the second one to it, obviously unsuccessfully. Any > advice on how to fix that? I think you already got pretty close. How about: [[ Permission to provide a hint to another process is governed by a ptrace access mode .B PTRACE_MODE_READ_REALCREDS check (see BR ptrace (2)); in addition, the caller must have the .B CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability. ]] [...] >>> +.TP >>> +.B ESRCH >>> +No process with ID >>> +.I pidfd >>> +exists. >> >> Should this maybe be: >> [[ >> The target process does not exist (i.e., it has terminated and >> been waited on). >> ]] >> >> See pidfd_send_signal(2). > > I "borrowed" mine from > https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/process_vm_readv.2.html but > either one sounds good to me. Maybe for pidfd_send_signal the wording > about termination is more important. Anyway, it's up to you. Just let > me know which one to use. I think the pidfd_send_signal(2) wording fits better. [...] Thanks, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
