-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
Implement most of bulk memory #976
Merged
fitzgen
merged 11 commits into
bytecodealliance:master
from
fitzgen:implement-most-of-bulk-memory
Feb 26, 2020
Merged
Implement most of bulk memory #976
fitzgen
merged 11 commits into
bytecodealliance:master
from
fitzgen:implement-most-of-bulk-memory
Feb 26, 2020
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
fitzgen
commented
Feb 25, 2020
fitzgen
commented
Feb 25, 2020
@alexcrichton I've addressed all your feedback, do you want to take another look at this? |
fitzgen
force-pushed
the
implement-most-of-bulk-memory
branch
2 times, most recently
from
February 25, 2020 21:27
f2d9448
to
8d1b94d
Compare
alexcrichton
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2020
crates/runtime/src/instance.rs
Outdated
// we need the incremental writes up to the OOB trap to be visible, | ||
// since this is dictated by the updated spec for the bulk memory | ||
// proposal. | ||
if num_uncopied > 0 { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Given WebAssembly/bulk-memory-operations#138 (comment) it sounds like this loop doesn't need to change much here?
fitzgen
force-pushed
the
implement-most-of-bulk-memory
branch
2 times, most recently
from
February 26, 2020 21:54
79c94ae
to
7813887
Compare
This adds support for the `table.copy` instruction from the bulk memory proposal. It also supports multiple tables, which were introduced by the reference types proposal. Part of bytecodealliance#928
Essentially, table and memory out of bounds errors are no longer link errors, but traps after linking. This means that the partail writes / inits are visible.
We've crossed the threshold where this is easier :)
fitzgen
force-pushed
the
implement-most-of-bulk-memory
branch
from
February 26, 2020 22:39
7813887
to
66634cc
Compare
arkpar
pushed a commit
to paritytech/wasmtime
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 4, 2020
This is a breaking API change: the following settings have been renamed: - jump_tables_enabled -> enable_jump_tables - colocated_libcalls -> use_colocated_libcalls - probestack_enabled -> enable_probestack - allones_funcaddrs -> emit_all_ones_funcaddrs
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Felt like a good time to start landing some of this work :)