yuzu-emu/breakpad
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/yuzu-emu/breakpad.git synced 2024-11-28 01:04:19 +01:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fix another table formatting issue in symbol_files.md

Browse Source 
This looked fine in the source but gitiles is very particular
about its table syntax.

Change-Id: I9ca8d61a5ca9656bc4f62297861540473485091a
Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/breakpad/breakpad/+/3485499
Reviewed-by: Lei Zhang <thestig@chromium.org>
This commit is contained in:
Deepanjan Roy 2022-02-23 16:48:53 -05:00 committed by Lei Zhang
parent 8e73e40c8c
commit 1da39e3a90
1 changed files with 16 additions and 16 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

32
docs/symbol_files.md
View File

@ -405,14 +405,14 @@ func+22: pc = *sp; sp += 4 ; pop return address and jump to it
The following table would describe the function above: The following table would describe the function above:
**code address** | **.cfa** | **r0 (on Google Code)** | **r1 (on Google Code)** | ... | **.ra** | **code address** | **.cfa** | **r0 (on Google Code)** | **r1 (on Google Code)** | ... | **.ra** |
:--------------- | :------- | :---------------------- | :---------------------- | :-- | :------- |:-----------------|:---------|:------------------------|:------------------------|:----|:---------|
func+0 | sp | | | | `cfa[0]` | func+0 | sp | | | | `cfa[0]` |
func+1 | sp+16 | | | | `cfa[0]` | func+1 | sp+16 | | | | `cfa[0]` |
func+2 | sp+16 | `cfa[-4]` | | | `cfa[0]` | func+2 | sp+16 | `cfa[-4]` | | | `cfa[0]` |
func+11 | sp+20 | `cfa[-4]` | | | `cfa[0]` | func+11 | sp+20 | `cfa[-4]` | | | `cfa[0]` |
func+21 | sp+20 | | | | `cfa[0]` | func+21 | sp+20 | | | | `cfa[0]` |
func+22 | sp | | | | `cfa[0]` | func+22 | sp | | | | `cfa[0]` |
Some things to note here: Some things to note here:
@ -447,14 +447,14 @@ To save space, the most common type of CFI record only mentions the table
entries at which changes take place. So for the above, the CFI data would only entries at which changes take place. So for the above, the CFI data would only
actually mention the non-blank entries here: actually mention the non-blank entries here:
**insn** | **cfa** | **r0 (on Google Code)** | **r1 (on Google Code)** | ... | **ra** | **insn** | **cfa** | **r0 (on Google Code)** | **r1 (on Google Code)** | ... | **ra** |
:------- | :------ | :---------------------- | :---------------------- | :-- | :------- |:---------|:--------|:------------------------|:------------------------|:----|:---------|
func+0 | sp | | | | `cfa[0]` | func+0 | sp | | | | `cfa[0]` |
func+1 | sp+16 | | | | | func+1 | sp+16 | | | | |
func+2 | | `cfa[-4]` | | | | func+2 | | `cfa[-4]` | | | |
func+11 | sp+20 | | | | | func+11 | sp+20 | | | | |
func+21 | | r0 (on Google Code) | | | | func+21 | | r0 (on Google Code) | | | |
func+22 | sp | | | | | func+22 | sp | | | | |
A `STACK CFI INIT` record indicates that, at the machine instruction at A `STACK CFI INIT` record indicates that, at the machine instruction at
_address_, belonging to some function, the value that _register<sub>n</sub>_ had _address_, belonging to some function, the value that _register<sub>n</sub>_ had