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

wasmtime Config: debug impl now iterates complete WasmFeatures flag set #8843

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 20, 2024

Conversation

pchickey
Copy link
Contributor

I noticed that the wasm_memory64 flag was left out of Config's debug impl, so rather than add it, I decided to use the bitflags::Flags::FLAGS const to iterate the complete set of flags.

THe downside of this change is that it will print flags which do not have a setter in Config, e.g. wasm_component_model_nested_names.

An alternative to this change is, rather than expanding out the single features: WasmFeatures member into many different debug_struct fields, the debug impl of WasmFeatures is used.

Here is a sample debug of Config with this change:

Config { debug_info: None, wasm_mutable_global: true, wasm_saturating_float_to_int: true, wasm_sign_extension: true, wasm_reference_types: true, wasm_multi_value: true, wasm_bulk_memory: true, wasm_simd: true, wasm_relaxed_simd: false, wasm_threads: false, wasm_shared_everything_threads: false, wasm_tail_call: false, wasm_floats: true, wasm_multi_memory: false, wasm_exceptions: false, wasm_memory64: false, wasm_extended_const: false, wasm_component_model: false, wasm_function_references: false, wasm_memory_control: false, wasm_gc: false, wasm_custom_page_sizes: false, wasm_component_model_values: false, wasm_component_model_nested_names: false, parallel_compilation: true, compiler_config: CompilerConfig { strategy: Some(Cranelift), target: None, settings: {"opt_level": "speed", "enable_verifier": "true"}, flags: {}, cache_store: None, clif_dir: None, wmemcheck: false }, parse_wasm_debuginfo: false }

I noticed that the wasm_memory64 flag was left out of Config's debug impl,
so rather than add it, I decided to use the `bitflags::Flags::FLAGS`
const to iterate the complete set of flags.

THe downside of this change is that it will print flags which do not
have a setter in Config, e.g. `wasm_component_model_nested_names`.

An alternative to this change is, rather than expanding out the single
`features: WasmFeatures` member into many different debug_struct fields,
the debug impl of WasmFeatures is used.

Here is a sample debug of Config with this change:

Config { debug_info: None, wasm_mutable_global: true, wasm_saturating_float_to_int: true, wasm_sign_extension: true, wasm_reference_types: true, wasm_multi_value: true, wasm_bulk_memory: true, wasm_simd: true, wasm_relaxed_simd: false, wasm_threads: false, wasm_shared_everything_threads: false, wasm_tail_call: false, wasm_floats: true, wasm_multi_memory: false, wasm_exceptions: false, wasm_memory64: false, wasm_extended_const: false, wasm_component_model: false, wasm_function_references: false, wasm_memory_control: false, wasm_gc: false, wasm_custom_page_sizes: false, wasm_component_model_values: false, wasm_component_model_nested_names: false, parallel_compilation: true, compiler_config: CompilerConfig { strategy: Some(Cranelift), target: None, settings: {"opt_level": "speed", "enable_verifier": "true"}, flags: {}, cache_store: None, clif_dir: None, wmemcheck: false }, parse_wasm_debuginfo: false }
@pchickey pchickey requested review from a team as code owners June 20, 2024 00:00
@pchickey pchickey requested review from alexcrichton and removed request for a team June 20, 2024 00:00
@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 labels Jun 20, 2024
Copy link

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.

@alexcrichton alexcrichton added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 20, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit 981d403 Jun 20, 2024
38 checks passed
@alexcrichton alexcrichton deleted the pch/config_debug_all_wasm_features branch June 20, 2024 15:28
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
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants