jpfau
This isn't mentioned in the article, since one of the anti-piracy/-emulation techniques I didn't discover at the time of writing it (due to my dump being an overdump) is that many of the games do this. They screw up input so it either boots but you can't play it at all, or input is unplayably slow. It detects it by having an interesting memory mirroring quirk in the cartridges that no other GBA carts have.
What does this have to do with speed?
On a GBA, VRAM is faster than ordinary RAM. Programs can do well to use it for tight inner loops.
Almost all programs use IWRAM for this. It's one of the things it's for. It's as fast if not faster than VRAM (depends on if the VRAM is being accessed by the PPU at the time).
Using STM (store multiple) to DMA registers? Again, go faster.
In retrospect, yeah this might actually be the case.
Save type masquerading might be code that helps when running on a development kit, but I admit that I can't think of what use it might have.
There are a handful of GBA games that lie about save type as anti-piracy and refuse to save or even boot if it finds the wrong one. It's also really the only anti-piracy technique that any other GBA games actually use, since it's quite effective against flash carts.
MGBA: Dumping the Undumped
Cycle Counting, Memory Stalls, Prefetch and Other Pitfalls
Classic NES Series Anti-Emulation Measures
What I did observe is that the games that DON'T invalidate the recompiled code tended to run ~20% slower, so I'm not really sure what I was doing wrong there. It mostly seems to be that the code my recompiler is outputting is less well optimized by the JIT, and not that the recompilation is too slow. It's also possible that my recompilation is screwing over the garbage collector, as I have a somewhat verbose intermediate representation that I created in the hopes that I could optimize the recompiled code. I don't have much experience with compilers though, and again, I never got around to this.
I've been pondering pushing the branch that I did this work on, but I was hoping to wait until I got it to perform better before pushing it.
You're correct that I'm scanning for the save type. Auto-detection is something I want to get in at some point, but I haven't quite gotten around to it yet. I was considering using a database for the save types as well, but I didn't know if such a database existed. I was just planning on pre-computing it by the same way I'm currently detecting it, which as you say has problems.