abrown opened PR #10501 from abrown:update-wasm-tools
to bytecodealliance:main
:
See details in comments.
abrown commented on PR #10501:
I'm opening this as a draft so we can figure out what to do about the failing
component-model-async
WAST tests. Some failures I've noticed:
- some canonical builtins have changed their return type from
i32
toi64
... this might mean changes to the CLIF lowering- we need to enable the right
CM_ASYNC_*
flags for some of these tests to continue to run (or disable them temporarily?)
abrown updated PR #10501.
github-actions[bot] commented on PR #10501:
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 nestedstruct
s).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.</details>
abrown updated PR #10501.
abrown submitted PR review.
abrown created PR review comment:
To respond to the helpful CI reminder bot, I just want to point out that this change does not in fact exercise these new CM-level features.
abrown has marked PR #10501 as ready for review.
abrown requested alexcrichton for a review on PR #10501.
abrown requested wasmtime-fuzz-reviewers for a review on PR #10501.
abrown requested wasmtime-core-reviewers for a review on PR #10501.
abrown requested wasmtime-default-reviewers for a review on PR #10501.
alexcrichton submitted PR review.
github-actions[bot] commented on PR #10501:
Subscribe to Label Action
cc @fitzgen
<details>
This issue or pull request has been labeled: "fuzzing", "wasmtime:api", "wasmtime:config"Thus the following users have been cc'd because of the following labels:
- fitzgen: fuzzing
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this label, edit the <code>.github/subscribe-to-label.json</code> configuration file.
Learn more.
</details>
abrown updated PR #10501.
abrown updated PR #10501.
abrown submitted PR review.
abrown created PR review comment:
...but no longer: 326ed15.
abrown merged PR #10501.
Last updated: Apr 17 2025 at 03:17 UTC