Hi, наб! On 1/13/22 03:27, наб wrote:
This is shorter, clearly separates the events from the flags, and more consistent (cf. EPOLLEXCLUSIVE which has a different message than the rest) Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- man2/epoll_ctl.2 | 33 +++------------------------------ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) diff --git a/man2/epoll_ctl.2 b/man2/epoll_ctl.2 index ec31cac72..c9f9649a5 100644 --- a/man2/epoll_ctl.2 +++ b/man2/epoll_ctl.2 @@ -156,6 +156,9 @@ Note that when reading from a channel such as a pipe or a stream socket, this event merely indicates that the peer closed its end of the channel. Subsequent reads from the channel will return 0 (end of file) only after all outstanding data in the channel has been consumed. +.PP +And one of the following input flags, which are never returned by
This sentence (as I understand it) is a continuation of _"The events member of the epoll_event structure is a bit mask composed by ORing together zero or more of the following available event types:"_, right?
So, the bitmask is composed by _zero or more_ event types, and _exactly one_ input flags? Just asking, I don't know the syscall. I think we should mix both sentences into a single one where it is very clear what the bitmask is composed of. And then a simple introduction sentence like: "The available event types are:" and then below the event types another similar one for introducing the input flags.
Your thoughts? Thanks, Alex -- Alejandro Colomar Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/
