alexcrichton labeled issue #5456:
This input:
(module (func (local i32 f64 v128 v128 v128 v128 v128 v128 f64 f64 f64 v128 v128 v128) f32.const 0 i32.const 0 f64.const 0 f64.store align=1 i32.const 0 f64.const 0 f64.store align=4 i32.const 1 local.get 3 v128.load64_lane offset=1416707644 align=1 0 drop drop ) (memory (;0;) 0 2) )
fails with
$ cargo run compile testcase0.shrunken.wat --static-memory-maximum-size 657468977 Finished dev [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.12s Running `target/debug/wasmtime compile testcase0.shrunken.wat --static-memory-maximum-size 657468977` thread '<unnamed>' panicked at 'you cannot add an instruction to a block already filled', cranelift/frontend/src/frontend.rs:533:13 note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
cc @fitzgen
alexcrichton opened issue #5456:
This input:
(module (func (local i32 f64 v128 v128 v128 v128 v128 v128 f64 f64 f64 v128 v128 v128) f32.const 0 i32.const 0 f64.const 0 f64.store align=1 i32.const 0 f64.const 0 f64.store align=4 i32.const 1 local.get 3 v128.load64_lane offset=1416707644 align=1 0 drop drop ) (memory (;0;) 0 2) )
fails with
$ cargo run compile testcase0.shrunken.wat --static-memory-maximum-size 657468977 Finished dev [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.12s Running `target/debug/wasmtime compile testcase0.shrunken.wat --static-memory-maximum-size 657468977` thread '<unnamed>' panicked at 'you cannot add an instruction to a block already filled', cranelift/frontend/src/frontend.rs:533:13 note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
cc @fitzgen
elliottt commented on issue #5456:
Looks like the
trap
emitted from the bounds checking code is emitted in the middle of a block:
https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/d9fdbfd50e653f93403405e4c4fd56cb77d034ae/cranelift/wasm/src/code_translator/bounds_checks.rs#L219-L221
elliottt edited a comment on issue #5456:
Looks like the
trap
emitted from the bounds checking code is emitted in the middle of a block:
https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/d9fdbfd50e653f93403405e4c4fd56cb77d034ae/cranelift/wasm/src/code_translator/bounds_checks.rs#L219-L221
The block is terminated by thetrap
, but there are additional instructions emitted after that.
elliottt edited a comment on issue #5456:
Looks like the
trap
emitted from the bounds checking code is emitted in the middle of a block:
https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/d9fdbfd50e653f93403405e4c4fd56cb77d034ae/cranelift/wasm/src/code_translator/bounds_checks.rs#L219-L221
The block is terminated by thetrap
, but there are additional instructions emitted after that. Should we stop translating if we've discovered that the load will unconditionally trap?
fitzgen closed issue #5456:
This input:
(module (func (local i32 f64 v128 v128 v128 v128 v128 v128 f64 f64 f64 v128 v128 v128) f32.const 0 i32.const 0 f64.const 0 f64.store align=1 i32.const 0 f64.const 0 f64.store align=4 i32.const 1 local.get 3 v128.load64_lane offset=1416707644 align=1 0 drop drop ) (memory (;0;) 0 2) )
fails with
$ cargo run compile testcase0.shrunken.wat --static-memory-maximum-size 657468977 Finished dev [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.12s Running `target/debug/wasmtime compile testcase0.shrunken.wat --static-memory-maximum-size 657468977` thread '<unnamed>' panicked at 'you cannot add an instruction to a block already filled', cranelift/frontend/src/frontend.rs:533:13 note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
cc @fitzgen
Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 16:03 UTC