Files
Sylpheed/docs/re
Sylpheed RE agent 222f35a7a7 re: blocker removed — chained attaches extend the observation window
The previous iteration declared route entries t=210 and t=240 unreachable
because a shell call is capped at 595 s. That was wrong, and it rested on an
assumption I never checked: launch_mission.sh leaves the emulator running and it
survives between Bash calls within a turn. Verified directly -- 611 s elapsed
and still running after the launching call had returned.

attach_session.sh attaches a pilot and probe to an already-running mission, and
attaches chain, so the window is bounded by the turn rather than by one call.

On one continuous mission: 300 s of clean observation followed by an attach that
ran 135 s before freezing, giving 435 s of cumulative verified-live wall-clock.
The craft population fell from 300 to 258, so 42 were destroyed, and deployed
fell 41 to 38. Zero confirmed arrivals throughout -- the longest verified-live
observation so far. That covers the first four phase-1 route entries, t=90, 120,
170 and 210; t=240 needs 436 s and was missed by a second.

The coverage claim is qualified rather than asserted. The wall-to-game
conversion uses 55 %, from a 16.5/s frame rate against an assumed 30 Hz tick,
but the witness has measured 8, 11, 11, 21 and 24 per second across runs. At the
low end the factor is 0.27 and the same 435 s covers only about 117
game-seconds, reaching t=90 alone. So what is established is that nothing
arrived in 435 s of verified-live phase-1 flight with 42 kills; how many
scheduled arrival times that spans depends on a tick rate that is not yet
pinned, and pinning it is what would make the result sharp.

Also refuted: SYLPH_HZ=3, a lower pilot poll rate, produced the lowest
calibrated frame rate of any run at 8/s while landing the most kills at 26. The
pilot's polling is not the throttle and lowering it does not buy game time.
2026-08-24 19:54:32 +00:00
..

Reverse-engineering knowledge base

This directory is the spec-side of the clean-room: it records what the original Project Sylpheed binary does (behaviour) and how its data is laid out, so that the Rust port can be implemented from these specs without re-deriving anything and without ever copying original code.

It exists to answer one question fast: "do we already know how X works, and how sure are we?"


The one rule that matters

Never document a claim more confidently than the evidence supports, and never paste original code here.

A wrong-but-confident note is worse than no note: someone builds on it and the bug hides for weeks. Every entry therefore carries an explicit confidence and its evidence. This mirrors the project method — measure the oracle, never infer; refute before believing.

Clean-room firewall

  • Allowed: behaviour descriptions, field offsets/types, formulas, state machines, observed input→output pairs, and references to the original by address (sub_821B68C0) or to xenia-rs/sylpheed.db.
  • Forbidden here and in crates/: pasted decompiled C/C++ or verbatim disassembled function bodies presented as the thing to reimplement. Cite the address; describe the behaviour in your own words. Disassembly is a tool for understanding, not a source to copy.

Confidence levels

Level Meaning Bar to reach it
CONFIRMED Behaviour verified against ground truth. ≥2 independent observations or one observation cross-checked against an oracle (canary framebuffer, a known-correct value, a second code path).
PROBABLE Strong single-source inference. One clean observation, or an unambiguous static read of the disassembly.
HYPOTHESIS Educated guess, not yet tested. Anything else. Must say what would confirm/refute it.

Promotion requires new evidence, not re-reading the old evidence. A HYPOTHESIS that "looks right again" is still a HYPOTHESIS. Only an independent check promotes it. If evidence later contradicts an entry, demote it and record the contradiction — do not silently edit the conclusion.


When to document

  • Right after a function/structure crosses from HYPOTHESIS to at least PROBABLE — before moving to the next code path, so the knowledge isn't lost or re-derived.
  • Whenever confidence changes (up or down) — append to the Evidence log, don't overwrite.
  • Not while it's still a pure guess with no evidence — a one-liner in the relevant backlog/plan is enough until there's something to stand on.

What to document

  • Functions/code pathsdocs/re/functions/<name>.md (one file per function or tight cluster).
  • Data structures / formatsdocs/re/structures/<name>.md.
  • Keep the index in INDEX.md (one line each: name · confidence · one-line summary).

Use the templates: _TEMPLATE.function.md, _TEMPLATE.structure.md.


How we find and confirm code paths (the toolchain)

Everything joins on the guest virtual address (PC) — code addresses are fixed by the XEX load, identical across our emulator and canary.

  • Static (cheap, try first): xenia-rs/sylpheed.db (DuckDB: 25 481 functions, xrefs, strings, vtables, imports). Query with xenia-rs/zq.pyzq.py grep <str>, zq.py xref <addr>, zq.py dis <lo> <hi>, zq.py fn <pc>. Entry points are usually a string (zq.py grep MSG_DEMO) or an import (movie/XMA API) xref'd back to the loader.
  • Dynamic (when static is ambiguous): run xenia-rs with its probe suite — --pc-probe / --audit-pc-probe-hex (fires at block entry), --mem-watch (mid-block reads/writes of a VA), --lr-trace (call/return chains), --trace-instructions, --dump-addr (read guest memory). These already exist; prefer them over hacking canary.
  • Oracle (correctness ground truth): canary — the Wine cross-build xenia-canary/build-cross/bin/Windows/Debug/xenia_canary.exe (the native Linux ELF crashes / does not run — do not use it). This is the only emulator that reaches the in-game menu; our xenia-rs never got past the intro video. Use canary to observe output (capture its framebuffer for texture colours), not usually to instrument code — though its build-cross toolchain does compile, so small C++ probes + rebuild are possible when needed. Run muted, one emulator process at a time, point it at the real ISO (not the symlink).

⚠️ VA-equality caveat: join code by PC (fixed), but never assume a data VA holds the same bytes across emulators — allocators differ. Compare data by content/layout.