Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 13:22): Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 13:22):yoshuawuyts opened PR #11828 from yoshuawuyts:rename-test-programs to bytecodealliance:main:
Description
This PR is a first step towards refactoring our test programs, starting by prefixing them based on whether they are p1, p2, or p3. These changes are fairly simple, but still change a lot of files - so I figured I'd start with some of the most obvious tests and check whether I'm going about making these changes the right way.
In terms of actual changes, the following rename has been applied:
preview2_->p2_api_->p2_api_cli_->p2_cli_http_->p2_http_preview1_->p1_Thought on a follow-up PR
Assuming this PR looks good and CI passes, I'm wondering what to do about some of the other tests. For example, we have the
nn_tests that are currently p2-only. I'm inclined to prefix those asp2_nn_, with the anticipation that eventually they will becomep3_nn_once they're moved over.There are also the
async_tests. Should those be renamed top3_async_? They're just about the component model, and not WASI directly. But they do exercise the p3 bindings generation. I feel like things would be different if the were Wast tests. But for now I'm inclined to say we should prefix those asp3_async_in a follow-up PR.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 13:22):yoshuawuyts requested wasmtime-wasi-reviewers for a review on PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 13:22):yoshuawuyts requested wasmtime-default-reviewers for a review on PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 13:22):yoshuawuyts requested wasmtime-core-reviewers for a review on PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 13:22):yoshuawuyts requested pchickey for a review on PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 13:52):yoshuawuyts commented on PR #11828:
Oops, didn't test locally with the right flags. Fixing the failing tests now.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 20:00):alexcrichton submitted PR review:
Thanks!
For example, we have the nn_ tests that are currently p2-only.
Given that wasi-nn hasn't had a stable wix release yet I'd say leave these as
nn_*and this can change in the future if a stable WIT release happens.There are also the async_ tests. Should those be renamed to p3_async_?
I'd leave these as
async_*because "p3" is mostly centered around WASIp3 and async bindings are sort of "just a component model thing". Basically for testing I think it's worthwhile keeping a separation between "p3" being WASIp3 and "component model async" being separate.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 09 2025 at 20:00):alexcrichton created PR review comment:
Mind leaving this in
~/.gitignoreto avoid adding it here too?
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 11 2025 at 18:53):yoshuawuyts updated PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 11 2025 at 18:53):yoshuawuyts submitted PR review.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 11 2025 at 18:53):yoshuawuyts created PR review comment:
done!
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 11 2025 at 18:56):yoshuawuyts edited PR #11828:
Description
This PR is a first step towards refactoring our test programs, starting by prefixing them based on whether they are p1, p2, or p3. These changes are fairly simple, but still change a lot of files - so I figured I'd start with some of the most obvious tests and check whether I'm going about making these changes the right way.
In terms of actual changes, the following rename has been applied:
before after preview2_p2_api_p2_api_cli_p2_cli_http_p2_http_preview1_p1_Thought on a follow-up PR
Assuming this PR looks good and CI passes, I'm wondering what to do about some of the other tests. For example, we have the
nn_tests that are currently p2-only. I'm inclined to prefix those asp2_nn_, with the anticipation that eventually they will becomep3_nn_once they're moved over.There are also the
async_tests. Should those be renamed top3_async_? They're just about the component model, and not WASI directly. But they do exercise the p3 bindings generation. I feel like things would be different if the were Wast tests. But for now I'm inclined to say we should prefix those asp3_async_in a follow-up PR.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 14 2025 at 10:50):yoshuawuyts updated PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 14 2025 at 10:53):yoshuawuyts updated PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 14 2025 at 10:57):yoshuawuyts updated PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 14 2025 at 11:34):yoshuawuyts updated PR #11828.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 14 2025 at 11:44):yoshuawuyts has marked PR #11828 as ready for review.
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 14 2025 at 12:34):yoshuawuyts commented on PR #11828:
Tests are passing; this should be ready to merge now!
Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 14 2025 at 15:05):alexcrichton merged PR #11828.
Last updated: Dec 06 2025 at 07:03 UTC