Stream: git-wasmtime

Topic: wasmtime / PR #10206 threads: add feature flags

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Feb 07 2025 at 19:51):

abrown opened PR #10206 from abrown:set-feature-flags to bytecodealliance:main:

This adds both the Cargo-level and CLI-level flags for the shared-everything-threads proposal. We may not want to expose this feature just yet, but I need a place to park this since the stack of commits to enable shared-everything threads is getting out of hand. The feedback I'm look for is: what we should be gating with this new Cargo feature?

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Feb 07 2025 at 22:44):

github-actions[bot] commented on PR #10206:

Label Messager: wasmtime:config

It looks like you are changing Wasmtime's configuration options. Make sure to
complete this check list:

• [ ] If you added a new Config method, you wrote extensive documentation for
  it.

  <details>

  Our documentation should be of the following form:

  ```text
  Short, simple summary sentence.

  More details. These details can be multiple paragraphs. There should be
  information about not just the method, but its parameters and results as
  well.

  Is this method fallible? If so, when can it return an error?

  Can this method panic? If so, when does it panic?

  Example

  Optional example here.
  ```

  </details>

• [ ] If you added a new Config method, or modified an existing one, you
  ensured that this configuration is exercised by the fuzz targets.

  <details>

  For example, if you expose a new strategy for allocating the next instance
  slot inside the pooling allocator, you should ensure that at least one of our
  fuzz targets exercises that new strategy.

  Often, all that is required of you is to ensure that there is a knob for this
  configuration option in [wasmtime_fuzzing::Config][fuzzing-config] (or one
  of its nested structs).

  Rarely, this may require authoring a new fuzz target to specifically test this
  configuration. See [our docs on fuzzing][fuzzing-docs] for more details.

  </details>

• [ ] If you are enabling a configuration option by default, make sure that it
  has been fuzzed for at least two weeks before turning it on by default.

[fuzzing-config]: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/ca0e8d0a1d8cefc0496dba2f77a670571d8fdcab/crates/fuzzing/src/generators.rs#L182-L194
[fuzzing-docs]: https://docs.wasmtime.dev/contributing-fuzzing.html

---

<details>

To modify this label's message, edit the <code>.github/label-messager/wasmtime-config.md</code> file.

To add new label messages or remove existing label messages, edit the
<code>.github/label-messager.json</code> configuration file.

Learn more.

</details>

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Feb 09 2025 at 17:55):

alexcrichton commented on PR #10206:

What do you think about using the preexisting threads Cargo feature for this? That's mostly avoiding runtime deps of threads/libstd/etc and having that gate both threads and shared-everything-threads seems reasonable to me

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Feb 09 2025 at 17:57):

alexcrichton commented on PR #10206:

Oh and do directly answer this:

The feedback I'm look for is: what we should be gating with this new Cargo feature?

I wrote up some basic thoughts here but the tl;dr; IMO is "anything that requires a runtime dependency" aka something outside of libcore. In that sense the current threads proposal is gated because it requires mutexes/etc to implement atomic notify/wait. I don't think that shared-everything-threads will require any more than threads, though, but any nontrivial dependency above the core crate should be gated.

(or do you have specific things you're curious about too?)

Last updated: Feb 28 2025 at 02:27 UTC