fitzgen opened PR #5335 from heap-addr-guard-pages to main:
Fixes #5328
FYI, I opted not to mess with or dedupe the similar logic in
cranelift-wasmsince that stuff is going to go away soon-ish when we removeheap_addrand collect all this logic intoheap_{load,store}. Excited to get to a point where this logic isn't spread across crates and straddling interfaces.
fitzgen requested alexcrichton for a review on PR #5335.
cfallin submitted PR review.
cfallin submitted PR review.
cfallin created PR review comment:
Is it worth a comment here on the
>=and the0xffff_ffff(i.e., the minus-one aspect)?In particular I think it's right because
- We trap if
index > bound + guard_size - offset - access_size- If the RHS of that is equal to
0xffff_ffff, index could be equal to it but not greater than it; so we cannot achieveindex > RHSI think it's a little unclear because above in the comment we have
index < 4GiB <= RHSbut here we are really relying onindex <= (4GiB - 1) <= RHS, which is also valid (<=is also transitive). I guess aligning the two makes things clearer, at least for me...
alexcrichton submitted PR review.
fitzgen updated PR #5335 from heap-addr-guard-pages to main.
fitzgen submitted PR review.
fitzgen created PR review comment:
Updated the comment above this to align more directly with the implementation.
fitzgen has enabled auto merge for PR #5335.
fitzgen merged PR #5335.
Last updated: Dec 13 2025 at 19:03 UTC