Files
Sylpheed/docs/re
sylph-decoder da46663c8a re: RETRACT "the game never draws eff3" -- a batched draw merged two quads
The console draws all five title flashes. My claim that ptlogo_back2eff3 is
never drawn was an instrument artefact, and I had reported it to the port with
three alternative explanations "ruled out".

A GPU draw can batch several quads -- indices=4 is one, indices=8 two,
indices=24 six -- and the UI draw log dumps only the first 8 vertices. Taking
min/max over a line's whole vertex list merges quads into one box.

eff3 is batched with eff4, and because the wipe family is right-aligned, eff3
(788..1196) lies ENTIRELY INSIDE eff4 (447..1196). The union is exactly eff4's
own extent, so the merged box matched eff4 to 1 px, eff3 vanished, and nothing
looked wrong.

Parsed per quad, all five fire in both title entries in the declared stagger:
eff1 130-131, eff2 133, eff3 133-134, eff4 133-135, eff/eff5 134+, back2 136+;
and 5953-5955 / 5955-5957 / 5957-5958 / 5957-5959 / 5958+ / 5962+ in entry 2.
Frames 133 and 134 are t=60.1 and 62.3, inside eff3's declared t in (58,64).

Also retracts "the developer splash is one composited quad" -- the same bug,
which the port refuted by arithmetic first (a 259-tall box cannot contain three
logos spanning y 164..585). It draws three logos and three glows as separate
quads in one indices=24 call; the 525x259 was gamearts_eff merged with
seta_eff. The 9-unit black hold is unaffected: those glows are the developer
splash's first draw.

The three "ruled out" explanations were all aimed at the wrong failure. In
particular the invisible-draw check counted draws with NO geometry line, when
the hiding place was draws with PARTIAL geometry. Refuting three wrong
hypotheses is not evidence for a fourth, and a list of failure modes written by
whoever built the instrument is the least likely to contain its blind spot.
Recorded in METHOD.md, along with the tell that was present and explained away:
a merged box carries the first quad's colour, which made one element's alpha
read 255/127/254 on consecutive frames.

New tool: tools/re-capture/quads_per_frame.py parses vertices in groups of four
and warns when the logged quad count falls short of indices/4.

Also guards a double-A-tap in ui_draw_capture.sh: the movie branch ignored that
TARGET=menu had already tapped, so a run tapped A on the title at t=23s and
again at t=27s on the transition; the guest faulted and Xenia dumped registers
to stdout until the file reached 519 MB.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01QsEPXWVaEpyfudtR6re1Pd
2026-08-29 20:49:27 +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.