wasmtime / PR #9158 Update handling of wasm features and ... · git-wasmtime

Stream: git-wasmtime

Topic: wasmtime / PR #9158 Update handling of wasm features and ...

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:03):

alexcrichton requested wasmtime-compiler-reviewers for a review on PR #9158.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:03):

alexcrichton requested cfallin for a review on PR #9158.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:03):

alexcrichton opened PR #9158 from alexcrichton:improve-wast-testing-and-features to bytecodealliance:main:

This commit is an attempt at making it easier to manage the set of variables we have in play with *.wast testing and wasm features. The Cranelift and Winch backends support different sets of wasm features at this time and historically Cranelift has also had architecture-specific support for wasm features. This is hoped to help simplify management of all of this in the future in addition to making *.wast testing more robust. Notable changes here are:

A Config no longer tracks a WasmFeatures but instead only tracks explicitly disabled/enabled features. The final WasmFeatures is then computed given the result of compiler configuration.

Default-enabled features now start from nothing instead of wasmparser's defaults to avoid future breakage there.

Each compiler configuration and/or backend now has a listed set of "this feature may panic" wasm features. These are all disabled by default and if explicitly enabled a Config::validate error is returned.

All *.wast tests are now run through both Cranelift and Winch. Tests are now asserted to either fail or pass depending on configuration and the whole test will fail if the result doesn't match the expectation.

Many gc proposal tests which are now passing are flagged as passing now. Failing winch tests are now explicitly listed instead of using a litany of patterns.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:03):

alexcrichton requested elliottt for a review on PR #9158.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:03):

alexcrichton requested wasmtime-core-reviewers for a review on PR #9158.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:05):

alexcrichton submitted PR review.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:05):

alexcrichton created PR review comment:

cc @saulecabrera I added some bare-bones pieces for Extern in a few places in this PR to get winch as "supporting" reference-types. Flagging Winch as not supporting reference types ended up being particularly difficult because it ends up disabling nearly all tests one way or another. The goal here was to just not panic on the existence of externref, but if you prefer I can try to figure out how to detect this elsewhere and reject it while keeping these panics.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:33):

alexcrichton updated PR #9158.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 20:37):

alexcrichton updated PR #9158.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 22:44):

github-actions[bot] commented on PR #9158:

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @saulecabrera

<details>
This issue or pull request has been labeled: "cranelift", "cranelift:wasm", "wasmtime:api", "wasmtime:config", "winch"

Thus the following users have been cc'd because of the following labels:

saulecabrera: winch

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this label, edit the <code>.github/subscribe-to-label.json</code> configuration file.

Learn more.
</details>

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 20 2024 at 22:44):

github-actions[bot] commented on PR #9158:

Label Messager: wasmtime:config

It looks like you are changing Wasmtime's configuration options. Make sure to
complete this check list:

[ ] If you added a new Config method, you wrote extensive documentation for
it.

<details>

Our documentation should be of the following form:

```text
Short, simple summary sentence.

More details. These details can be multiple paragraphs. There should be
information about not just the method, but its parameters and results as
well.

Is this method fallible? If so, when can it return an error?

Can this method panic? If so, when does it panic?

Example

Optional example here.
```

</details>

[ ] If you added a new Config method, or modified an existing one, you
ensured that this configuration is exercised by the fuzz targets.

<details>

For example, if you expose a new strategy for allocating the next instance
slot inside the pooling allocator, you should ensure that at least one of our
fuzz targets exercises that new strategy.

Often, all that is required of you is to ensure that there is a knob for this
configuration option in [wasmtime_fuzzing::Config][fuzzing-config] (or one
of its nested structs).

Rarely, this may require authoring a new fuzz target to specifically test this
configuration. See [our docs on fuzzing][fuzzing-docs] for more details.

</details>

[ ] If you are enabling a configuration option by default, make sure that it
has been fuzzed for at least two weeks before turning it on by default.

[fuzzing-config]: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/ca0e8d0a1d8cefc0496dba2f77a670571d8fdcab/crates/fuzzing/src/generators.rs#L182-L194
[fuzzing-docs]: https://docs.wasmtime.dev/contributing-fuzzing.html

<details>

To modify this label's message, edit the <code>.github/label-messager/wasmtime-config.md</code> file.

To add new label messages or remove existing label messages, edit the
<code>.github/label-messager.json</code> configuration file.

Learn more.

</details>

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 21 2024 at 11:35):

saulecabrera submitted PR review.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 21 2024 at 11:35):

saulecabrera created PR review comment:

This looks good to me, thanks!

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 21 2024 at 23:07):

elliottt submitted PR review:

Awesome!

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Aug 22 2024 at 15:17):

alexcrichton merged PR #9158.

Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 16:03 UTC