Did you know that moving on top of a boss sprite doesn't kill the player in
TH04, only in TH05?
That's the first of only three interesting discoveries in these 3 pushes,
all of which concern TH04. But yeah, 3 for something as seemingly simple as
these shared boss functions… that's still not quite the speed-up I had hoped
for. While most of this can be blamed, again, on TH04 and all of its
hardcoded complexities, there still was a lot of work to be done on the
maintenance front as well. These functions reference a bunch of code I RE'd
years ago and that still had to be brought up to current standards, with the
dependencies reaching from 📝 boss explosions
over 📝 text RAM overlay functionality up to
in-game dialog loading.
The latter provides a good opportunity to talk a bit about x86 memory
segmentation. Many aspiring PC-98 developers these days are very scared
of it, with some even going as far as to rather mess with Protected Mode and
DOS extenders just so that they don't have to deal with it. I wonder where
that fear comes from… Could it be because every modern programming language
I know of assumes memory to be flat, and lacks any standard language-level
features to even express something like segments and offsets? That's why
compilers have a hard time targeting 16-bit x86 these days: Doing anything
interesting on the architecture requires giving the programmer full
control over segmentation, which always comes down to adding the
typical non-standard language extensions of compilers from back in the day.
And as soon as DOS stopped being used, these extensions no longer made sense
and were subsequently removed from newer tools. A good example for this can
be found in an old version of the
NASM manual: The project started as an attempt to make x86 assemblers
simple again by throwing out most of the segmentation features from
MASM-style assemblers, which made complete sense in 1996 when 16-bit DOS and
Windows were already on their way out. But there was a point to all
those features, and that's why ReC98 still has to use the supposedly
inferior TASM.
Not that this fear of segmentation is completely unfounded: All the
segmentation-related keywords, directives, and #pragmas
provided by Borland C++ and TASM absolutely can be the cause of many
weird runtime bugs. Even if the compiler or linker catches them, you are
often left with confusing error messages that aged just as poorly as memory
segmentation itself.
However, embracing the concept does provide quite the opportunity for
optimizations. While it definitely was a very crazy idea, there is a small
bit of brilliance to be gained from making proper use of all these
segmentation features. Case in point: The buffer for the in-game dialog
scripts in TH04 and TH05.
// Thanks to the semantics of `far` pointers, we only need a single 32-bit
// pointer variable for the following code.
extern unsigned char far *dialog_p;
// This master.lib function returns a `void __seg *`, which is a 16-bit
// segment-only pointer. Converting to a `far *` yields a full segment:offset
// pointer to offset 0000h of that segment.
dialog_p = (unsigned char far *)hmem_allocbyte(/* … */);
// Running the dialog script involves pointer arithmetic. On a far pointer,
// this only affects the 16-bit offset part, complete with overflow at 64 KiB,
// from FFFFh back to 0000h.
dialog_p += /* … */;
dialog_p += /* … */;
dialog_p += /* … */;
// Since the segment part of the pointer is still identical to the one we
// allocated above, we can later correctly free the buffer by pulling the
// segment back out of the pointer.
hmem_free((void __seg *)dialog_p);
If dialog_p was a huge pointer, any pointer
arithmetic would have also adjusted the segment part, requiring a second
pointer to store the base address for the hmem_free call. Doing
that will also be necessary for any port to a flat memory model. Depending
on how you look at it, this compression of two logical pointers into a
single variable is either quite nice, or really, really dumb in its
reliance on the precise memory model of one single architecture.
Why look at dialog loading though, wasn't this supposed to be all about
shared boss functions? Well, TH04 unnecessarily puts certain stage-specific
code into the boss defeat function, such as loading the alternate Stage 5
Yuuka defeat dialog before a Bad Ending, or initializing Gengetsu after
Mugetsu's defeat in the Extra Stage.
That's TH04's second core function with an explicit conditional branch for
Gengetsu, after the
📝 dialog exit code we found last year during EMS research.
And I've heard people say that Shinki was the most hardcoded fight in PC-98
Touhou… Really, Shinki is a perfectly regular boss, who makes proper use of
all internal mechanics in the way they were intended, and doesn't blast
holes into the architecture of the game. Even within TH05, it's Mai and Yuki
who rely on hacks and duplicated code, not Shinki.
The worst part about this though? How the function distinguishes Mugetsu
from Gengetsu. Once again, it uses its own global variable to track whether
it is called the first or the second time within TH04's Extra Stage,
unrelated to the same variable used in the dialog exit function. But this
time, it's not just any newly created, single-use variable, oh no. In a
misguided attempt to micro-optimize away a few bytes of conventional memory,
TH04 reserves 16 bytes of "generic boss state", which can (and are) freely
used for anything a boss doesn't want to store in a more dedicated
variable.
It might have been worth it if the bosses actually used most of these
16 bytes, but the majority just use (the same) two, with only Stage 4 Reimu
using a whopping seven different ones. To reverse-engineer the various uses
of these variables, I pretty much had to map out which of the undecompiled
danmaku-pattern functions corresponds to which boss
fight. In the end, I assigned 29 different variable names for each of the
semantically different use cases, which made up another full push on its
own.
Now, 16 bytes of wildly shared state, isn't that the perfect recipe for
bugs? At least during this cursory look, I haven't found any obvious ones
yet. If they do exist, it's more likely that they involve reused state from
earlier bosses – just how the Shinki death glitch in
TH05 is caused by reusing cheeto data from way back in Stage 4 – and
hence require much more boss-specific progress.
And yes, it might have been way too early to look into all these tiny
details of specific boss scripts… but then, this happened:
Looks similar to another
screenshot of a crash in the same fight that was reported in December,
doesn't it? I was too much in a hurry to figure it out exactly, but notice
how both crashes happen right as the last of Marisa's four bits is destroyed.
KirbyComment has suspected
this to be the cause for a while, and now I can pretty much confirm it
to be an unguarded division by the number of on-screen bits in
Marisa-specific pattern code. But what's the cause for Kurumi then?
As for fixing it, I can go for either a fast or a slow option:
Superficially fixing only this crash will probably just take a fraction
of a push.
But I could also go for a deeper understanding by looking at TH04's
version of the 📝 custom entity structure. It
not only stores the data of Marisa's bits, but is also very likely to be
involved in Kurumi's crash, and would get TH04 a lot closer to 100%
PI. Taking that look will probably need at least 2 pushes, and might require
another 3-4 to completely decompile Marisa's fight, and 2-3 to decompile
Kurumi's.
OK, now that that's out of the way, time to finish the boss defeat function…
but not without stumbling over the third of TH04's quirks, relating to the
Clear Bonus for the main game or the Extra Stage:
To achieve the incremental addition effect for the in-game score display
in the HUD, all new points are first added to a score_delta
variable, which is then added to the actual score at a maximum rate of
61,110 points per frame.
There are a fixed 416 frames between showing the score tally and
launching into MAINE.EXE.
As a result, TH04's Clear Bonus is effectively limited to
(416 × 61,110) = 25,421,760 points.
Only TH05 makes sure to commit the entirety of the
score_delta to the actual score before switching binaries,
which fixes this issue.
And after another few collision-related functions, we're now truly,
finally ready to decompile bosses in both TH04 and TH05! Just as the
anything funds were running out… The
remaining ¼ of the third push then went to Shinki's 32×32 ball bullets,
rounding out this delivery with a small self-contained piece of the first
TH05 boss we're probably going to look at.
Next up, though: I'm not sure, actually. Both Shinki and Elis seem just a
little bit larger than the 2¼ or 4 pushes purchased so far, respectively.
Now that there's a bunch of room left in the cap again, I'll just let the
next contribution decide – with a preference for Shinki in case of a tie.
And if it will take longer than usual for the store to sell out again this
time (heh), there's still the
📝 PC-98 text RAM JIS trail word rendering research
waiting to be documented.
Technical debt, part 10… in which two of the PMD-related functions came
with such complex ramifications that they required one full push after
all, leaving no room for the additional decompilations I wanted to do. At
least, this did end up being the final one, completing all
SHARED segments for the time being.
The first one of these functions determines the BGM and sound effect
modes, combining the resident type of the PMD driver with the Option menu
setting. The TH04 and TH05 version is apparently coded quite smartly, as
PC-98 Touhou only needs to distinguish "OPN- /
PC-9801-26K-compatible sound sources handled by PMD.COM"
from "everything else", since all other PMD varieties are
OPNA- / PC-9801-86-compatible.
Therefore, I only documented those two results returned from PMD's
AH=09h function. I'll leave a comprehensive, fully documented
enum to interested contributors, since that would involve research into
basically the entire history of the PC-9800 series, and even the clearly
out-of-scope PC-88VA. After all, distinguishing between more versions of
the PMD driver in the Option menu (and adding new sprites for them!) is
strictly mod territory.
The honor of being the final decompiled function in any SHARED
segment went to TH04's snd_load(). TH04 contains by far the
sanest version of this function: Readable C code, no new ZUN bugs (and
still missing file I/O error handling, of course)… but wait, what about
that actual file read syscall, using the INT 21h, AH=3Fh DOS
file read API? Reading up to a hardcoded number of bytes into PMD's or
MMD's song or sound effect buffer, 20 KiB in TH02-TH04, 64 KiB in
TH05… that's kind of weird. About time we looked closer into this.
Turns out that no, KAJA's driver doesn't give you the full 64 KiB of one
memory segment for these, as especially TH05's code might suggest to
anyone unfamiliar with these drivers. Instead,
you can customize the size of these buffers on its command line. In
GAME.BAT, ZUN allocates 8 KiB for FM songs, 2 KiB for sound
effects, and 12 KiB for MMD files in TH02… which means that the hardcoded
sizes in snd_load() are completely wrong, no matter how you
look at them. Consequently, this read syscall
will overflow PMD's or MMD's song or sound effect buffer if the
given file is larger than the respective buffer size.
Now, ZUN could have simply hardcoded the sizes from GAME.BAT
instead, and it would have been fine. As it also turns out though,
PMD has an API function (AH=22h) to retrieve the actual
buffer sizes, provided for exactly that purpose. There is little excuse
not to use it, as it also gives you PMD's default sizes if you don't
specify any yourself.
(Unless your build process enumerates all PMD files that are part of the
game, and bakes the largest size into both snd_load() and
GAME.BAT. That would even work with MMD, which doesn't have
an equivalent for AH=22h.)
What'd be the consequence of loading a larger file then? Well, since we
don't get a full segment, let's look at the theoretical limit first.
PMD prefers to keep both its driver code and the data buffers in a single
memory segment. As a result, the limit for the combined size of the song,
instrument, and sound effect buffer is determined by the amount of
code in the driver itself. In PMD86 version 4.8o (bundled with TH04
and TH05) for example, the remaining size for these buffers is exactly
45,555 bytes. Being an actually good programmer who doesn't blindly trust
user input, KAJA thankfully validates the sizes given via the
/M, /V, and /E command-line options
before letting the driver reside in memory, and shuts down with an error
message if they exceed 40 KiB. Would have been even better if he calculated
the exact size – even in the current
PMD version 4.8s from
January 2020, it's still a hardcoded value (see line 8581).
Either way: If the file is larger than this maximum, the concrete effect
is down to the INT 21h, AH=3Fh implementation in the
underlying DOS version. DOS 3.3 treats the destination address as linear
and reads past the end of the segment,
DOS
5.0 and DOSBox-X truncate the number of bytes to not exceed the remaining
space in the segment, and maybe there's even a DOS that wraps around
and ends up overwriting the PMD driver code. In any case: You will
overwrite what's after the driver in memory – typically, the game .EXE and
its master.lib functions.
It almost feels like a happy accident that this doesn't cause issues in
the original games. The largest PMD file in any of the 4 games, the -86
version of 幽夢 ~ Inanimate Dream, takes up 8,099 bytes,
just under the 8,192 byte limit for BGM. For modders, I'd really recommend
implementing this properly, with PMD's AH=22h function and
error handling, once position independence has been reached.
Whew, didn't think I'd be doing more research into KAJA's drivers during
regular ReC98 development! That's probably been the final time though, as
all involved functions are now decompiled, and I'm unlikely to iterate
over them again.
And that's it! Repaid the biggest chunk of technical debt, time for some
actual progress again. Next up: Reopening the store tomorrow, and waiting
for new priorities. If we got nothing by Sunday, I'm going to put the
pending [Anonymous] pushes towards some work on the website.
Alright, no more big code maintenance tasks that absolutely need to be
done right now. Time to really focus on parts 6 and 7 of repaying
technical debt, right? Except that we don't get to speed up just yet, as
TH05's barely decompilable PMD file loading function is rather…
complicated.
Fun fact: Whenever I see an unusual sequence of x86 instructions in PC-98
Touhou, I first consult the disassembly of Wolfenstein 3D. That game was
originally compiled with the quite similar Borland C++ 3.0, so it's quite
helpful to compare its ASM to the
officially released source
code. If I find the instructions in question, they mostly come from
that game's ASM code, leading to the amusing realization that "even John
Carmack was unable to get these instructions out of this compiler"
This time though, Wolfenstein 3D did point me
to Borland's intrinsics for common C functions like memcpy()
and strchr(), available via #pragma intrinsic.
Bu~t those unfortunately still generate worse code than what ZUN
micro-optimized here. Commenting how these sequences of instructions
should look in C is unfortunately all I could do here.
The conditional branches in this function did compile quite nicely
though, clarifying the control flow, and clearly exposing a ZUN
bug: TH05's snd_load() will hang in an infinite loop when
trying to load a non-existing -86 BGM file (with a .M2
extension) if the corresponding -26 BGM file (with a .M
extension) doesn't exist either.
Unsurprisingly, the PMD channel monitoring code in TH05's Music Room
remains undecompilable outside the two most "high-level" initialization
and rendering functions. And it's not because there's data in the
middle of the code segment – that would have actually been possible with
some #pragmas to ensure that the data and code segments have
the same name. As soon as the SI and DI registers are referenced
anywhere, Turbo C++ insists on emitting prolog code to save these
on the stack at the beginning of the function, and epilog code to restore
them from there before returning.
Found that out in
September 2019, and confirmed that there's no way around it. All the
small helper functions here are quite simply too optimized, throwing away
any concern for such safety measures. 🤷
Oh well, the two functions that were decompilable at least indicate
that I do try.
Within that same 6th push though, we've finally reached the one function
in TH05 that was blocking further progress in TH04, allowing that game
to finally catch up with the others in terms of separated translation
units. Feels good to finally delete more of those .ASM files we've
decompiled a while ago… finally!
But since that was just getting started, the most satisfying development
in both of these pushes actually came from some more experiments with
macros and inline functions for near-ASM code. By adding
"unused" dummy parameters for all relevant registers, the exact input
registers are made more explicit, which might help future port authors who
then maybe wouldn't have to look them up in an x86 instruction
reference quite as often. At its best, this even allows us to
declare certain functions with the __fastcall convention and
express their parameter lists as regular C, with no additional
pseudo-registers or macros required.
As for output registers, Turbo C++'s code generation turns out to be even
more amazing than previously thought when it comes to returning
pseudo-registers from inline functions. A nice example for
how this can improve readability can be found in this piece of TH02 code
for polling the PC-98 keyboard state using a BIOS interrupt:
inline uint8_t keygroup_sense(uint8_t group) {
_AL = group;
_AH = 0x04;
geninterrupt(0x18);
// This turns the output register of this BIOS call into the return value
// of this function. Surprisingly enough, this does *not* naively generate
// the `MOV AL, AH` instruction you might expect here!
return _AH;
}
void input_sense(void)
{
// As a result, this assignment becomes `_AH = _AH`, which Turbo C++
// never emits as such, giving us only the three instructions we need.
_AH = keygroup_sense(8);
// Whereas this one gives us the one additional `MOV BH, AH` instruction
// we'd expect, and nothing more.
_BH = keygroup_sense(7);
// And now it's obvious what both of these registers contain, from just
// the assignments above.
if(_BH & K7_ARROW_UP || _AH & K8_NUM_8) {
key_det |= INPUT_UP;
}
// […]
}
I love it. No inline assembly, as close to idiomatic C code as something
like this is going to get, yet still compiling into the minimum possible
number of x86 instructions on even a 1994 compiler. This is how I keep
this project interesting for myself during chores like these.
We might have even reached peak
inline already?
And that's 65% of technical debt in the SHARED segment repaid
so far. Next up: Two more of these, which might already complete that
segment? Finally!