alexcrichton requested fitzgen for a review on PR #11990.
alexcrichton opened PR #11990 from alexcrichton:disable-mach-ports-during-fuzzing to bytecodealliance:main:
Reported [here] and confirmed locally for myself it appears that sometimes exceptions bypass our mach port thread and go to signal handlers instead. I've got no idea why myself and it seems non-deterministic. Instead of trying to bottom this out I've gone ahead and just disabled mach ports during fuzzing. Mach ports are mainly there to play nice with Breakpad and such which isn't a concern during fuzzing, so using signals should work just as well.
[here]: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/issues/11850#issuecomment-3493237271
<!--
Please make sure you include the following information:
If this work has been discussed elsewhere, please include a link to that
conversation. If it was discussed in an issue, just mention "issue #...".Explain why this change is needed. If the details are in an issue already,
this can be brief.Our development process is documented in the Wasmtime book:
https://docs.wasmtime.dev/contributing-development-process.htmlPlease ensure all communication follows the code of conduct:
https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
-->
alexcrichton requested wasmtime-fuzz-reviewers for a review on PR #11990.
github-actions[bot] commented on PR #11990:
Subscribe to Label Action
cc @fitzgen
<details>
This issue or pull request has been labeled: "fuzzing"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>
saulecabrera submitted PR review.
alexcrichton merged PR #11990.
Last updated: Dec 06 2025 at 07:03 UTC