Claude (auto-RE)
20299c05a1
Third revision of this claim, and this one has the writer.
Word A (singleton +80) has exactly ONE writer in the image. Scanning all 22
callers of the +80 struct copier (0x82175110) for one that stores to the copy's
word 0 gives a single hit, 0x821C1820, inside GamePart_StageClear:
if (this+1004 & 0x20000) skip ; already recorded
copy local = singleton->progress ; src = obj+80
local.word0 |= 1 << (this+84)
if changed: singleton->set(local) ; assign + async persist
and this+84 is the STAGE NUMBER, by two independent uses: 0x821C1760 indexes a
20-byte per-stage record array with it (this + (x+7)*20, three words plus an
8-byte timestamp -- the savegame's 16x20 SHAB shape), and 0x821C1EEC/0x821C1924
pass it as the index into the config key "STAGE" (0x820A2540), the debriefing's
px_deb_stage01..16 sprite list.
So a challenge mission's REQUIREMENT n means "stage n has been cleared", and the
<24 / >=24 split is the disc's own stage numbering: story 1-16 and tutorial 18-23
in word A, challenge 24-29 as word B bits 0-5. TimeAttack needs stage 16 -- the
last story mission -- and the other five chain off challenge stages 25-29. That
is what the raw numbers suggested in the first place.
REFUTED: "the bit space is the game's 24 achievements". ACHIEVEMENTS_REQUIREMENTS
having 24 entries and the gate splitting at 24 is a COINCIDENCE -- 24 is also the
first challenge stage's id. Nothing copies the Debriefing's masks (+208/+736/+740)
into +80, which is the check that should have preceded the claim.
The achievement work itself stands and is kept, retitled and rescoped in
structures/achievements.md: the XACH table (.pe 0x8FBCBC, 36-byte records,
1000G self-check), the 24 names/descriptions, the on-disc ACHIEVEMENTS_REQUIREMENTS
list, and the XACHIEVEMENT_DETAILS/XAM read path. It just does not gate the
challenge missions.
Still open: word B (+1956) has no known writer -- GamePart_StageClear's
unconditional 1 << x would land a challenge stage on word A bits 24-29, not word
B, so clearing a challenge mission must be recorded by another path (presumably
the one that also stores its Time/Points record).
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 toxenia-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
HYPOTHESISto at leastPROBABLE— 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 paths →
docs/re/functions/<name>.md(one file per function or tight cluster). - Data structures / formats →
docs/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 withxenia-rs/zq.py—zq.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-rswith 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; ourxenia-rsnever got past the intro video. Use canary to observe output (capture its framebuffer for texture colours), not usually to instrument code — though itsbuild-crosstoolchain 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.