Stream: git-wasmtime

Topic: wasmtime / PR #2258 machinst x64: check SSE requirements ...


view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 02 2020 at 16:05):

bnjbvr requested cfallin for a review on PR #2258.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 02 2020 at 16:05):

bnjbvr opened PR #2258 from check-sse to main:

This builds on top of #2255 (two commits), and adds a dynamic check that every time we emit an instruction that uses SSE features, the features were enabled by the configuration. This avoids cases where we could use e.g. SSE4.1 on a machine that doesn't have it.

The way to pass the ISA flags is a bit tricky; please see commit message for the explanation of why it was done this way. Happy to try a different way if anybody has better suggestions!

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 02 2020 at 16:33):

cfallin submitted PR Review.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 02 2020 at 16:33):

cfallin submitted PR Review.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 02 2020 at 16:33):

cfallin created PR Review Comment:

Could we rename this to isa_requirement()? I think "ISA" is a more standard term than "iset" as an abbreviation.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 02 2020 at 16:33):

cfallin created PR Review Comment:

Are all of the below SSE2, e.g. JmpIf? (Perhaps they have some options or encodings that are?)

(To be clear, I like this function and the explicitness of this match; I'm just curious about the comment is all.)

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 05 2020 at 14:53):

bnjbvr submitted PR Review.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 05 2020 at 14:53):

bnjbvr created PR Review Comment:

Yep, I just checked the ones for which i had a few doubts:

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 05 2020 at 14:55):

bnjbvr updated PR #2258 from check-sse to main:

This builds on top of #2255 (two commits), and adds a dynamic check that every time we emit an instruction that uses SSE features, the features were enabled by the configuration. This avoids cases where we could use e.g. SSE4.1 on a machine that doesn't have it.

The way to pass the ISA flags is a bit tricky; please see commit message for the explanation of why it was done this way. Happy to try a different way if anybody has better suggestions!

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 05 2020 at 16:00):

bnjbvr updated PR #2258 from check-sse to main:

This builds on top of #2255 (two commits), and adds a dynamic check that every time we emit an instruction that uses SSE features, the features were enabled by the configuration. This avoids cases where we could use e.g. SSE4.1 on a machine that doesn't have it.

The way to pass the ISA flags is a bit tricky; please see commit message for the explanation of why it was done this way. Happy to try a different way if anybody has better suggestions!

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 06 2020 at 15:59):

bnjbvr updated PR #2258 from check-sse to main:

This builds on top of #2255 (two commits), and adds a dynamic check that every time we emit an instruction that uses SSE features, the features were enabled by the configuration. This avoids cases where we could use e.g. SSE4.1 on a machine that doesn't have it.

The way to pass the ISA flags is a bit tricky; please see commit message for the explanation of why it was done this way. Happy to try a different way if anybody has better suggestions!

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 07 2020 at 08:58):

bnjbvr updated PR #2258 from check-sse to main:

This builds on top of #2255 (two commits), and adds a dynamic check that every time we emit an instruction that uses SSE features, the features were enabled by the configuration. This avoids cases where we could use e.g. SSE4.1 on a machine that doesn't have it.

The way to pass the ISA flags is a bit tricky; please see commit message for the explanation of why it was done this way. Happy to try a different way if anybody has better suggestions!

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 07 2020 at 09:43):

bnjbvr requested cfallin for a review on PR #2258.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 07 2020 at 17:33):

cfallin submitted PR Review.

view this post on Zulip Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Oct 08 2020 at 07:21):

bnjbvr merged PR #2258.


Last updated: Dec 23 2024 at 12:05 UTC