Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit.

From	Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com>
Newsgroups	comp.theory
Subject	Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit.
Date	2025-11-05 01:20 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<10ee8pf$2rds$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <10e1f9c$7n4p$1@dont-email.me> <10edf6q$3r1an$1@dont-email.me> <20251104113331.177@kylheku.com> <10edpme$3ugoj$1@dont-email.me> <20251104134343.652@kylheku.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 04/11/2025 21:58, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 2025-11-04, Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> wrote:
>> On 04/11/2025 19:36, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>> On 2025-11-04, Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> wrote:
>>>>       DDD[1] ends, after HHH[1] detects "infinite recursion" and returns 0.
>>>>       DDD[2] ends, after HHH[2] detects "infinite recursion" and returns 0.
>>>>       DDD[3] ends, after HHH[3] detects "infinite recursion" and returns 0.
>>>>       DDD[4] ends, after HHH[4] detects "infinite recursion" and returns 0.
>>>
>>> If every HHH deallocates the memory resources of the terminated DDD,
>>> this should be able to keep running indefinitely.
>>>
>>> There is no recursion chewing up a single linear stack that will
>>> overflow.
>>>
>> True.  With the code as it is, it didn't last very long before out of memory:
>>
>> .....
>> RECK: ---------------
>> RECK: continuing simulation of [50]: entry == 000021B2 (_MJT_DD), code_end == 000021D4, stack ==
>> 00F4D0E0
>> [51]--Allocate (00000018) --> 00fe2498
>> [51]--Allocate (00000034) --> 00fe24b8
>> [51]--Allocate (00000034) --> 00fe24f4
>> [51]--Allocate (00010000) --> 00fe2530
>> RECK: test case allocated new simulation [52]: 00fe2498:00000000:00fe24b8:00fe24f4:00fe2530
>> [51]New slave_stack at:fe2530
>> [51]--Allocate(240000) failed
>> [51]
>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:0
>> RECK: 000021b2 is _MJT_DD
>> RECK: newly executing [52]: entry == 000021B2 (_MJT_DD), code_end == 000021D4, stack == 00FE2530
>> [52][000021b2][00ff2528][00ff252c] 55               push ebp
>> Ran out of memory@ Address[00000000]
>>
>> So it ran out while resuming MJT_DD[50].  Like you say, the progress was linear, because each new
>> level resumed is like the original first level simulation, so there's no slowing down as we get
>> deeper.
> 
> Each new level is resumed using a DebugStep() loop inside a function in
> reckoning.cc, which runs on the host processor directly, and so it
> strips away the any extra layer of interpreter penalty under which that
> simulation had operated prior to being resumed.

That works fine.  Another idea would be to call LoadState() once, and for your loop to call 
Execute_Instruction() rather than DebugStep().  (Execute_Instruction() is how the outer code is 
executed, i.e. HHH[0] etc..  It would come out much the same I think, but saving all the 
LoadState/SaveState per-instruction calls.  OTOH using DebugStep() is probably more 'logical' - 
making fewer assumptions about how simulation is implemented...)

> 
> In principle, it could be compiled for a different machine; if you port
> and build x86utm for an ARM, our DebugStep loop in reckoning.cc will be
> ARM code, calling into an ARM-compiled DebugStep, calling into an
> ARM-compiled x86emu.
> 
> DebugStep itself is always native, regardless of the simulation level
> from which it is invoked; the x86emu code comprising it is never
> simulated. When test cases like HHH call DebugStep (via a simplified
> API), that is recognized by the VM and treated as one giant "microcoded"
> instruction coded inside x86utm_exe.
> 
> (The idea of the x86 emulator recognizing certain function calls and
> implementing them as "microcode" is a decent hack. I don't like that
> it performs string comparisons on function names to do the dispatch.
> I.e. when a CALL instruction is handled, the destination address
> is first mapped to a name using the COFF reader context and then
> string comparisons check that name against a vocabulary of function
> names handled directly by the VM. Regardless, Olcott did a good
> job in that regard; it's unclear why he's acting so dumb now. Maybe a
> decade of cognitive decline? If that's literally the ony thing he coded
> in ten years, and isn't working in any job, that's  not enough to keep
> the brain from turning into mush.)

Yeah, I think PO's implementation on that front is ok.  On a real OS, some SVC-like processor 
instruction would be used, but that's not callable via C without ASM extensions.  An OS would 
provide C-callable stubs you could link with, but PO's approach is light-weight and works, keeping 
everything in one obj file.  [He could have declared DebugStep() et al. as extern in halt7.c rather 
than having to code empty dummy routines, but hey-ho!]

I don't really see that PO has declined recently - It seems to me he's been the way he is for as 
long as I recall.  I would say he's become markedly ruder of late, though!  Maybe that's all related 
to his LLMs pandering to his delusions and giving him a renewed confidence.


Mike.

Thread

x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-26 05:29 +0000
  Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-10-26 09:52 +0000
    Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-26 15:20 +0000
  Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 12:37 -0700
    Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-26 20:30 +0000
      Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 13:43 -0700
      Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 13:49 -0700
        Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-26 21:46 +0000
  Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 22:16 -0700
    Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 22:17 -0700
  Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-10-31 04:51 +0000
    Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-31 05:18 +0000
      Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-10-31 15:38 +0000
      Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 11:14 -0500
        Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-10-31 16:35 +0000
          Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 11:55 -0500
            Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 13:51 -0400
              Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-31 18:03 +0000
                Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 14:10 -0400
      Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 11:23 -0500
        Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 13:19 -0400
        Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-31 17:37 +0000
    Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-04 18:04 +0000
      Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 18:36 +0000
        Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-04 18:59 +0000
      Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 19:36 +0000
        Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-04 21:03 +0000
          Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 21:58 +0000
            Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-05 01:20 +0000
              Kaz does not understand his own code. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 20:14 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 02:43 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 21:06 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 03:33 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-05 07:47 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 21:51 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 05:12 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 23:23 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 07:01 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 08:55 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 17:35 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 12:17 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 13:43 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:24 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 20:39 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:43 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 01:56 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 20:21 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 04:36 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 23:12 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 07:54 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 09:19 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-06 16:39 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:10 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 17:16 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:26 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 12:34 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:58 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 13:01 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 12:04 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 13:15 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 18:37 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-06 20:03 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 14:24 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 21:16 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 21:39 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 22:10 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 14:04 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 20:45 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 14:57 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 18:14 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 12:27 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 18:46 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 14:10 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 21:03 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:54 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:08 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 20:24 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:05 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:15 -0600
                Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:18 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:27 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:32 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:38 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:39 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:50 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:53 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:57 -0800
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:57 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 23:04 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:15 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 23:25 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 23:00 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 07:51 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 09:16 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 10:22 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 10:08 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:26 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 10:49 -0600
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:56 -0500
                Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:16 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 13:49 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-05 18:55 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:23 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-06 14:33 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 09:13 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 21:38 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:15 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:41 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 20:45 -0500
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 18:39 -0800
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 12:04 -0800
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-05 07:42 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 05:33 -0600
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-05 16:43 +0000
                Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 10:56 -0600

csiph-web