Files
Sylpheed/docs/re
sylph-decoder 5b0a6e6666 re: the plate delay was on the disc all along -- my instruction is refuted
The port caught this with arithmetic off the disc, and it was right: build 2 has
a keyframe group of its own, so "when build 4 has settled, wait 2.13 s, then
composite build 2" puts the plate at settle + 2.13 + 3.97 s. Confirmed build 2's
group here independently of their message: `ptbtn00.t32` reaches a=255 at t=238.

The reconciliation needs no free parameter. Both builds run on ONE clock, started
together, and the premise that fails is `rest.t`:

  rest.t is NOT when a screen settles. It is the last HOLD keyframe before the
  exit. ptlogo1 rests at t=251 and stops moving at t=42.

The title's visible build-in ends at t=118, where pteff01, pteff02.prm and
ptlogoall_eff end their ramps together. 238 - 118 = 120 units = 2.000 s, against
a measured 2.138 and 2.132. So the interval the two runs agreed on to 6 ms was a
DECLARED one and I handed over a wall-clock reading of it.

That reading is 6.7% long, and the corpus already knew why: 120 units in 2.135 s
is the game presenting at 28.06 / 28.14 fps against a nominal 30, and the idle
title was independently measured at 28.5 fps before these runs. Corroborated from
inside the same two runs -- first pixels -> settle is 1.643 s and 2.131 s, a 30%
spread, while settle -> plate is 2.138 and 2.132. Frames are dropped during the
build-in, not during the hold, which a change in the game's own timing could not
do.

So the port authors nothing here. What is unchanged: ScreenView still has to draw
two builds at once and the boot's end state is still not plate-free.

Not settled, and said so on the page: which reading of the keyframe times is
right (it moves the plate by 2 units and I cannot separate them from these
traces), and my settle landmark to better than +/-5 units.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014voBspJ6kFncNErZJuZcLw
2026-08-29 12:43:41 +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.

The status markers

The table above is the confidence scale. The markers that appear in BACKLOG.md and the structures/ pages are a separate, and until now undefined, vocabulary. They mean:

Marker Meaning
Confirmed — verified against ground truth.
🟡 Partial: true as far as it goes, or true under a stated assumption.
Open question. Nobody has answered it yet.
🔴 Refuted — shown false — or blocked by something the container cannot do.
A specific claim that was tried and failed. Prefer 🔴.
🚧 Work started and not finished.

🔴 never means "we have not run it yet." That is or 🚧. Reserve 🔴's "blocked" sense for a real limit of the box — no push credentials, no hardware Vulkan (lavapipe only), or a decision only the user can make. The box can run the emulator, script input, screenshot, read guest memory, and build and test Rust, so "needs a run" is never a blocker. This paragraph exists because the marker was undefined for 98 uses and three of them were mislabelled that way.

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.