On 6/3/2025 10:29 PM, dbush wrote:
On 6/3/2025 11:26 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/3/2025 10:20 PM, dbush wrote:
On 6/3/2025 11:07 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/3/2025 9:54 PM, dbush wrote:
On 6/3/2025 10:51 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/3/2025 9:42 PM, dbush wrote:
On 6/3/2025 10:29 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/3/2025 8:57 PM, dbush wrote:
On 6/3/2025 5:14 PM, olcott wrote:
On 6/3/2025 3:48 PM, joes wrote:
Am Tue, 03 Jun 2025 14:47:23 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 6/3/2025 3:28 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 02.jun.2025 om 17:52 schreef olcott:
>
DDD correctly emulated by HHH diverges from DDD correctly emulated by
HHH1 as soon as HHH begins emulating itself emulating DDD, marked
below.
*HHH1 never emulates itself emulating DDD*
>
*This is the beginning of the divergence of the behavior*
*of DDD emulated by HHH versus DDD emulated by HHH1*
>
Misleading words when you change the meaning of diverging.
Mike showed the traces side by side. Even after many requests, you
still cannot show the first instruction that is interpreted differently
by HHH and HHH1. The only difference is that HHH gives up the
simulation too early.
>
As soon as HHH begins emulating itself and HHH1 NEVER begins emulating
itself THIS IS THE DIVERGENCE.
Yes, that is exactly the point where HHH aborts.
>
Both the divergence and the abort are shown below.
>
_DDD()
[00002183] 55 push ebp
[00002184] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00002186] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[0000218b] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
[00002190] 83c404 add esp,+04
[00002193] 5d pop ebp
[00002194] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002194]
>
_main()
[000021a3] 55 push ebp
[000021a4] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[000021a6] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[000021ab] e843f3ffff call 000014f3 ; call HHH1
[000021b0] 83c404 add esp,+04
[000021b3] 33c0 xor eax,eax
[000021b5] 5d pop ebp
[000021b6] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0020) [000021b6]
>
machine stack stack machine assembly
address address data code language
======== ======== ======== ========== =============
[000021a3][0010382d][00000000] 55 push ebp ; main()
[000021a4][0010382d][00000000] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; main()
[000021a6][00103829][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[000021ab][00103825][000021b0] e843f3ffff call 000014f3 ; call HHH1
New slave_stack at:1038d1
>
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:1138d9
[00002183][001138c9][001138cd] 55 push ebp ; DDD of HHH1
[00002184][001138c9][001138cd] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; DDD of HHH1
[00002186][001138c5][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[0000218b][001138c1][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
New slave_stack at:14e2f9
>
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:15e301
[00002183][0015e2f1][0015e2f5] 55 push ebp ; DDD of HHH[0]
[00002184][0015e2f1][0015e2f5] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; DDD of HHH[0]
[00002186][0015e2ed][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[0000218b][0015e2e9][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
New slave_stack at:198d21
>
THIS IS WHERE THE DIVERGENCE OF DDD EMULATED BY HHH
AND DDD EMULATED BY HHH1 BEGINS
>
So how exactly do HHH and HHH1 emulate the first instruction of HHH differently?
>
>
The question is incorrect.
HHH emulates DDD two times and HHH1 emulates DDD one time
the whole second time is the divergence.
>
There is no divergence if the instructions are emulated exactly the same in both cases.
>
HHH1(DDD) emulates DDD exactly one time.
HHH(DDD) emulates DDD exactly two times.
>
The whole second time that HHH emulates DDD is
divergence.
>
>
Let the record show that Peter Olcott has failed to identify an instruction that HHH and HHH1 emulated differently.
>
>
When HHH emulates itself emulating DDD and emulates
DDD a second time this second emulation of DDD begins
at its own address 00002183.
>
HHH1 only emulates DDD exactly once.
>
>
>
Irrelevant, as that does not change the fact that the emulations performed by HHH and HHH1 are exactly the same up to the point that HHH aborts, as you have just admitted on the record:
>
>
No matter what anyone ever said or misconstrued the
actual execution trace proves:
>
That the emulations performed by HHH and HHH1 are identical up to the point that HHH aborts,
Counter-factual as anyone that understands
the x86 language can clearly see.
(a) Executed HHH1(DDD) simulates DDD
(b) that calls a simulated HHH(DDD) that simulates DDD
(c) that calls a simulated HHH(DDD) that simulates DDD
It is ONLY after this whole extra sequence that HHH aborts.
_DDD()
[00002183] 55 push ebp
[00002184] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[00002186] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[0000218b] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
[00002190] 83c404 add esp,+04
[00002193] 5d pop ebp
[00002194] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002194]
_main()
[000021a3] 55 push ebp
[000021a4] 8bec mov ebp,esp
[000021a6] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[000021ab] e843f3ffff call 000014f3 ; call HHH1
[000021b0] 83c404 add esp,+04
[000021b3] 33c0 xor eax,eax
[000021b5] 5d pop ebp
[000021b6] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0020) [000021b6]
machine stack stack machine assembly
address address data code language
======== ======== ======== ========== =============
[000021a3][0010382d][00000000] 55 push ebp ; main()
[000021a4][0010382d][00000000] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; main()
[000021a6][00103829][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[000021ab][00103825][000021b0] e843f3ffff call 000014f3 ; call HHH1
New slave_stack at:1038d1
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:1138d9
[00002183][001138c9][001138cd] 55 push ebp ; DDD of HHH1
[00002184][001138c9][001138cd] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; DDD of HHH1
[00002186][001138c5][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[0000218b][001138c1][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
New slave_stack at:14e2f9
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation Execution Trace Stored at:15e301
[00002183][0015e2f1][0015e2f5] 55 push ebp ; DDD of HHH[0]
[00002184][0015e2f1][0015e2f5] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; DDD of HHH[0]
[00002186][0015e2ed][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[0000218b][0015e2e9][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
New slave_stack at:198d21
*This is the beginning of the divergence of the behavior*
*of DDD emulated by HHH versus DDD emulated by HHH1*
[00002183][001a8d19][001a8d1d] 55 push ebp ; DDD of HHH[1]
[00002184][001a8d19][001a8d1d] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; DDD of HHH[1]
[00002186][001a8d15][00002183] 6883210000 push 00002183 ; push DDD
[0000218b][001a8d11][00002190] e833f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
[00002190][001138c9][001138cd] 83c404 add esp,+04 ; DDD of HHH1
[00002193][001138cd][000015a8] 5d pop ebp ; DDD of HHH1
[00002194][001138d1][0003a980] c3 ret ; DDD of HHH1
[000021b0][0010382d][00000000] 83c404 add esp,+04 ; main()
[000021b3][0010382d][00000000] 33c0 xor eax,eax ; main()
[000021b5][00103831][00000018] 5d pop ebp ; main()
[000021b6][00103835][00000000] c3 ret ; main()
Number of Instructions Executed(352831) == 5266 Pages
-- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
Re: DDD emulated by HHH diverges from DDD emulated by HHH1
Re: DDD emulated by HHH diverges from DDD emulated by HHH1