Stream: git-wasmtime

Topic: wasmtime / issue #4252 fix(wasmtime):`Config` methods sho...

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jun 09 2022 at 17:28):

PureWhiteWu commented on issue #4252:

Sorry for this late fix.

r? @alexcrichton @cfallin

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jun 09 2022 at 17:52):

github-actions[bot] commented on issue #4252:

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @peterhuene

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

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

• peterhuene: wasmtime:api

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 (Jun 09 2022 at 17:52):

github-actions[bot] commented on issue #4252:

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 (Jun 09 2022 at 18:36):

github-actions[bot] commented on issue #4252:

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @fitzgen, @peterhuene

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

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

• fitzgen: fuzzing
• peterhuene: wasmtime:c-api

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 (Jun 09 2022 at 20:08):

PureWhiteWu commented on issue #4252:

@alexcrichton Thanks for your review and suggestions!
It's too late now for me, so I need to complete these changes tomorrow.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jun 10 2022 at 11:52):

PureWhiteWu commented on issue #4252:

Config::profiler could defer creation of the profiling agent to Engine-construction. This would actually also remove the Arc around it since there's no more need to clone it.

This has been done.

Config::cache_config_load could defer its I/O to Engine::new.

For this part, I think the entire CacheConfig needs to be refactored. I think a separate Cache struct should be used instead of using CacheConfig as both the config and cache itself.

This may be not be a minor change, so I will think this may need another pr. I've also submitted a tracking issue #4257 for this.

Size normalization in methods like Config::{static,dynamic}_memory_guard_size could instead happen in Engine::new instead of as a side effect of calling the configuration method.

I don't think defer these things to Engine::new can bring us gain, but will make these associated code dispersed, so I didn't change this.

And for the CompilerBuilder part I think this should also be implemented in another PR. And here's the tracking issue #4258.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Jun 13 2022 at 14:51):

PureWhiteWu commented on issue #4252:

Thank you for your patient instructions and review!

Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 16:03 UTC