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 introspecting pulley at runtime #9886

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

Conversation

alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@alexcrichton alexcrichton commented Dec 20, 2024

This commit includes a few assorted changes to improve detection of whether Wasmtime is using Pulley at runtime:

  • A new Engine::is_pulley API is added.
  • A new wasmtime_engine_is_pulley C API is added.
  • The Config::target method is now available regardless of compilation features.
  • The Engine::target method now consults the Config to have the same fallback logic for when a target is not explicitly configured.

cc #1980 (comment)

This commit includes a few assorted changes to improve detection of
whether Wasmtime is using Pulley at runtime:

* A new `Engine::is_pulley` API is added.
* A new `wasmtime_engine_is_pulley` C API is added.
* The `Config::target` method is now available regardless of compilation
  features.
* The `Engine::target` method now consults the `Config` to have the same
  fallback logic for when a target is not explicitly configured.

cc bytecodealliance#1980
@alexcrichton alexcrichton marked this pull request as ready for review December 20, 2024 20:19
@alexcrichton alexcrichton requested a review from a team as a code owner December 20, 2024 20:19
@alexcrichton alexcrichton requested review from fitzgen and removed request for a team December 20, 2024 20:19
@github-actions github-actions bot added wasmtime:api Related to the API of the `wasmtime` crate itself wasmtime:c-api Issues pertaining to the C API. wasmtime:config Issues related to the configuration of Wasmtime labels Dec 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.

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:c-api Issues pertaining to the C API. wasmtime:config Issues related to the configuration of Wasmtime
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant