wasmtime / PR #9545 Remove static/dynamic memories from p... · git-wasmtime

Stream: git-wasmtime

Topic: wasmtime / PR #9545 Remove static/dynamic memories from p...

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 02 2024 at 20:41):

alexcrichton opened PR #9545 from alexcrichton:update-memory-configuration-options to bytecodealliance:main:

This commit removes the terminology of "static" and "dynamic" memories from the public-facing documentation of Wasmtime, notably on the Config structure and its various configuration settings. The goal of this commit is in the same vein as #9543 which is to simplify the memory settings of Wasmtime for users in this case.

This change doesn't actually have any code changes beyond renames (and handling now-deprecated CLI options). The goal of this commit is to basically rewrite how we document the effect of various settings of Wasmtime. Notably:

Config::static_memory_maximum_size is now memory_reservation.

Config::static_memory_forced is now memory_reservation_is_maximum.

Config::dynamic_memory_reserved_for_growth is now memory_reservation_for_growth.

Documentation for all of these options has been rewritten and updated to take into account the removal of "dynamic" and "static" terminology. Additionally more words have been written about the various effects of each setting and how things related to wasm features such as index type sizes and custom page sizes.

The rewritten documentation is intended to basically already match what Wasmtime does today. I believe that all of these settings are useful in one form or another so none have been dropped but the updated documentation is intended to help simplify the mental model for how they're processed internally and how they affect allocations and such.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 02 2024 at 20:41):

alexcrichton requested fitzgen for a review on PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 02 2024 at 20:41):

alexcrichton requested wasmtime-fuzz-reviewers for a review on PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 02 2024 at 20:41):

alexcrichton requested wasmtime-core-reviewers for a review on PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 02 2024 at 20:49):

alexcrichton updated PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 02 2024 at 20:56):

alexcrichton updated PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 02 2024 at 23:44):

github-actions[bot] commented on PR #9545:

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @fitzgen

<details>
This issue or pull request has been labeled: "fuzzing", "wasmtime:api", "wasmtime:c-api", "wasmtime:config"

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>

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 02 2024 at 23:44):

github-actions[bot] commented on PR #9545:

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 (Nov 04 2024 at 20:12):

fitzgen submitted PR review:

Thanks! Some bike shedding inline below, interested in what you think.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 20:12):

fitzgen created PR review comment:

I don't love the name memory_reservation_is_maximum. Here are a few alternative bike sheds:

memory_reservation_is_final

memory_reservation_is_immovable

memory_reservation_moves

memory_reservation_relocates

memory_reservation_reallocs

memory_is_final

memory_is_immovable

memory_moves

memory_relocates

memory_reallocs

I don't love any of these. Soft preference for memory_moves, I guess? Thoughts?

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 22:47):

alexcrichton updated PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 22:47):

alexcrichton submitted PR review.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 22:47):

alexcrichton created PR review comment:

Ok I've settled on memory_may_move, mind doing another pass over the docs I have for the method?

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 23:01):

alexcrichton updated PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 23:01):

alexcrichton requested fitzgen for a review on PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 23:26):

fitzgen submitted PR review:

nitpicks on docs wording below, but lgtm

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 23:26):

fitzgen created PR review comment:

tiny edit to clarify that pagesize=1 is only for this memory
    ///   case its page size is 1, so it's 4096 bytes. Memory can also grow no

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 23:26):

fitzgen created PR review comment:

This should be reworded, maybe

        /// Do not allow Wasm linear memories to move in the host
        /// process's address space.
        pub memory_may_move: Option<bool>,

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 23:26):

fitzgen created PR review comment:

    ///   loop-invariant code motion (hoisting the base pointer out of a loop).

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 04 2024 at 23:26):

fitzgen created PR review comment:

    ///   the memory configuration works at runtime.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 05 2024 at 00:52):

alexcrichton updated PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 05 2024 at 00:52):

alexcrichton has enabled auto merge for PR #9545.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 05 2024 at 00:56):

alexcrichton edited PR #9545:

This commit removes the terminology of "static" and "dynamic" memories from the public-facing documentation of Wasmtime, notably on the Config structure and its various configuration settings. The goal of this commit is in the same vein as #9543 which is to simplify the memory settings of Wasmtime for users in this case.

This change doesn't actually have any code changes beyond renames (and handling now-deprecated CLI options). The goal of this commit is to basically rewrite how we document the effect of various settings of Wasmtime. Notably:

Config::static_memory_maximum_size is now memory_reservation.

Config::static_memory_forced is now memory_may_move.

Config::dynamic_memory_reserved_for_growth is now memory_reservation_for_growth.

Documentation for all of these options has been rewritten and updated to take into account the removal of "dynamic" and "static" terminology. Additionally more words have been written about the various effects of each setting and how things related to wasm features such as index type sizes and custom page sizes.

The rewritten documentation is intended to basically already match what Wasmtime does today. I believe that all of these settings are useful in one form or another so none have been dropped but the updated documentation is intended to help simplify the mental model for how they're processed internally and how they affect allocations and such.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Nov 05 2024 at 01:21):

alexcrichton merged PR #9545.

Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 17:03 UTC