This repository has been archived on 2026-09-16. You can view files and clone it. You cannot open issues or pull requests or push a commit.
Files
Syplheed-Reborn/docs/re
Sylpheed RE agent d674fee457 re: the periodic rescan was the freeze driver; first trustworthy negative
Two changes this iteration, one failed and reverted, one that worked.

Trimming the witness calibration to eight spread 512 KB windows instead of the
full region found 17 candidates, none of them frame counters, and the witness
then reported 0 of 17 stalled on every sample of a run that recorded 13 losses.
That is a total contradiction, caught by the same internal check that exposed
the previous three witness failures. The frame-rate cluster is sparse and spread
sampling misses it. Reverted: two 32 MB reads once at startup is simply the
price of a witness that works.

The recurring cost was the periodic rescan, a 32 MB read every 90 to 180
seconds, and it exists only to catch craft appearing from nowhere -- which the
roster work already established does not happen, since every participant is
allocated at mission load and an arrival is a state change rather than an
allocation. Disabled.

The result is the first fully clean probed run: 3875 candidates, 32 witnesses at
11/s, no stall flag on any sample from t=0 to t=210, and eight losses spread
across it. Previous probed runs froze at 27, 45, 83, 183 and 255 seconds. This
one ended on the turn timeout. One run, so not proven, but together with the
clean no-probe control it points at recurring heavy reads rather than at memory
reading as such.

That also produces the first arrival result that means what it says. Every
earlier one carried a caveat -- a stalled guest, an unvalidated witness, a probe
degrading what it measured. This one has a validated witness reporting no
stalls, a demonstrably live guest, and a clean end: zero confirmed arrivals over
210 s of verified-live Stage 02 flight, roughly 115 game-seconds, while the
player destroyed eight craft.

It does not settle the question. The route table's t = 170, 210 and 240 entries
remain out of reach in a single turn. But it does establish that nothing arrives
in the first ~115 game-seconds of phase 1 under those conditions, which none of
the previous fifteen runs could honestly claim.
2026-08-24 18:16:49 +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.