Fix formatting

Author: zeyi2

clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/android/cloexec-pipe.rst

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ android-cloexec-pipe
 ====================
 
 This check detects usage of ``pipe()``. Using ``pipe()`` is not recommended,
-``pipe2()`` is the suggested replacement. The check also adds the O_CLOEXEC
+``pipe2()`` is the suggested replacement. The check also adds the ``O_CLOEXEC``
 flag that marks the file descriptor to be closed in child processes.
 Without this flag a sensitive file descriptor can be leaked to a
 child process, potentially into a lower-privileged SELinux domain.

clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/android/cloexec-pipe2.rst

@@ -3,8 +3,8 @@
 android-cloexec-pipe2
 =====================
 
-This check ensures that pipe2() is called with the O_CLOEXEC flag.
-The check also adds the O_CLOEXEC flag that marks the file descriptor
+This check ensures that ``pipe2()`` is called with the ``O_CLOEXEC`` flag.
+The check also adds the ``O_CLOEXEC`` flag that marks the file descriptor
 to be closed in child processes.
 Without this flag a sensitive file descriptor can be leaked to a child process,
 potentially into a lower-privileged SELinux domain.

clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/android/comparison-in-temp-failure-retry.rst

@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ Example buggy usage looks like:
  // Do something with cs.
  }
 
-Because TEMP_FAILURE_RETRY will check for whether the result
+Because ``TEMP_FAILURE_RETRY`` will check for whether the result
 *of the comparison* is ``-1``, and retry if so.
 
 If you encounter this, the fix is simple: lift the comparison out of the

clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/bugprone/assignment-in-if-condition.rst

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ equality tests.
 
 This check finds all assignments within `if` conditions, including ones that
 are not flagged by `-Wparentheses` due to an extra set of parentheses, and
-including assignments that call an overloaded `operator=()`. The identified
+including assignments that call an overloaded ``operator=()``. The identified
 assignments violate
 `BARR group "Rule 8.2.c" <https://barrgroup.com/embedded-systems/books/embedded-c-coding-standard/statement-rules/if-else-statements>`_.
 

clang-tools-extra/docs/clang-tidy/checks/bugprone/suspicious-enum-usage.rst

@@ -23,11 +23,11 @@ bitmask if the three conditions below are true at the same time:
 So whenever the non pow-of-2 element is used as a bitmask element we diagnose a
 misuse and give a warning.
 
-2. Investigating the right hand side of `+=` and `|=` operator.
-3. Check only the enum value side of a `|` and `+` operator if one of them is
- not enum val.
-4. Check both side of `|` or `+` operator where the enum values are from the
- same enum type.
+2. Investigating the right hand side of ``+=`` and ``|=`` operator.
+3. Check only the enum value side of a ``|`` and ``+`` operator if one of
+ them is not enum val.
+4. Check both side of ``|`` or ``+`` operator where the enum values are from
+ the same enum type.
 
 Examples: