alexcrichton opened PR #3189 from oom-more
to main
:
Previously the memory64 support meant that sometimes we wouldn't call
the limiter because the calculation for the minimum size requested would
overflow. Instead Wasmtime now wraps the minimum size in something a bit
smaller than the address space to inform the limiter, which should
guarantee that although the limiter is called with "incorrect"
information it's effectively correct and is allowed a pass to learn that
a massive memory was requested.This was found by the fuzzers where a request for the absolute maximal
size of 64-bit memory (e.g. the entire 64-bit address space) didn't
actually invoke the limiter which means that we mis-classified an
instantiation error and didn't realize that it was an OOM.<!--
Please ensure that the following steps are all taken care of before submitting
the PR.
[ ] This has been discussed in issue #..., or if not, please tell us why
here.[ ] A short description of what this does, why it is needed; if the
description becomes long, the matter should probably be discussed in an issue
first.[ ] This PR contains test cases, if meaningful.
- [ ] A reviewer from the core maintainer team has been assigned for this PR.
If you don't know who could review this, please indicate so. The list of
suggested reviewers on the right can help you.Please ensure all communication adheres to the code of conduct.
-->
cfallin submitted PR review.
pchickey submitted PR review.
alexcrichton updated PR #3189 from oom-more
to main
.
alexcrichton merged PR #3189.
Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 16:03 UTC