Stream: git-wasmtime

Topic: wasmtime / issue #7072 Add MPK-protected stripes to the p...

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Sep 21 2023 at 02:44):

github-actions[bot] commented on issue #7072:

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @peterhuene

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

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 (Sep 21 2023 at 02:45):

github-actions[bot] commented on issue #7072:

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 (Sep 21 2023 at 19:10):

fitzgen commented on issue #7072:

Super excited for this!! Don't have time to look today, but I can look tomorrow.

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Sep 21 2023 at 21:30):

alexcrichton commented on issue #7072:

Oh also we talked in person but I wanted to write down a few things too:

• PKRU will need preservation across async suspension. Ideally we'd have a test that would segfault if we didn't do this, for example we execute in one store and suspend, and then after suspending we read a memory from another store (which should have a different stripe)
• We'll want tests where PKRU is forced enabled and we assert that memories are indeed compacted together and indeed are inaccessible from other stores. For example create two stores, assert on the host that the base pointers are <6G apart, and then assert that from wasm we can't read other memories (e.g. all reads trap)

Wasmtime GitHub notifications bot (Sep 29 2023 at 18:01):

fitzgen commented on issue #7072:

Thanks for all your hard work on this feature @abrown!!

Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 16:03 UTC