Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enable the memory64 proposal by default #9937

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

The memory64 proposal for WebAssembly moved to phase 4 early last November which was the final remaining blocker for enabling it in Wasmtime. I've gone ahead and enabled it here with all the other checkboxes being ticked such as:

  • Tests - all spec tests are enabled and we have a few tests here and there for memory64 behavior throughout the unit test suite.

  • Finished - this proposal's memory-facing bits have been done for quite some time and the final 64-bit table bits have been done for a bit now as well.

  • Fuzzed - this is enabled in wasm-smith and additionally has custom fuzzing via the memory_accesses fuzzer.

  • API - all APIs related to memory work with u64 values to accommodate 64-bit memories and the 64-bit-ness is reflected in the type of memories.

  • C API - the C API's functions for working with memories all reflect 64-bit indices like the Rust API.

The memory64 proposal for WebAssembly moved to phase 4 early last
November which was the final remaining blocker for enabling it in
Wasmtime. I've gone ahead and enabled it here with all the other
checkboxes being ticked such as:

* Tests - all spec tests are enabled and we have a few tests here and
  there for memory64 behavior throughout the unit test suite.

* Finished - this proposal's memory-facing bits have been done for quite
  some time and the final 64-bit table bits have been done for a bit now
  as well.

* Fuzzed - this is enabled in `wasm-smith` and additionally has custom
  fuzzing via the `memory_accesses` fuzzer.

* API - all APIs related to memory work with `u64` values to accommodate
  64-bit memories and the 64-bit-ness is reflected in the type of memories.

* C API - the C API's functions for working with memories all reflect
  64-bit indices like the Rust API.
@alexcrichton alexcrichton requested review from a team as code owners January 6, 2025 21:19
@alexcrichton alexcrichton requested review from fitzgen and removed request for a team January 6, 2025 21:19
@github-actions github-actions bot added wasmtime:api Related to the API of the `wasmtime` crate itself wasmtime:config Issues related to the configuration of Wasmtime wasmtime:docs Issues related to Wasmtime's documentation labels Jan 6, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 6, 2025

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.

    Our documentation should be of the following form:

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

    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 (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 for more 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.


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

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

Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor

@dicej dicej left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Do we need to do anything special (that hasn't already been done) to indicate that memory64 is not yet compatible with components? Or will that be caught by wasmparser at validation time?

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member Author

Oh you know that's a good point. I haven't checked up on the state of memory64 and components in awhile. I know some parts support some things but not all, and I suspect that there are a number of memory64-related panics in Wasmtime which I should convert to errors first before landing this.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member Author

On review looks like less has support for this than I thought. I've opted to go with a wasmparser validation change for now since components don't currently specify how everything works anyway.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
wasmtime:api Related to the API of the `wasmtime` crate itself wasmtime:config Issues related to the configuration of Wasmtime wasmtime:docs Issues related to Wasmtime's documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants