-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 870
Report a host limit for memories too large for the shell to allocate #8898
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
Merged
+31
−1
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ | ||
| ;; NOTE: Assertions have been generated by update_lit_checks.py --output=fuzz-exec and should not be edited. | ||
|
|
||
| ;; RUN: wasm-opt %s -all --fuzz-exec-before -q -o /dev/null 2>&1 | filecheck %s | ||
|
|
||
| ;; A maximal memory64 declares 2^48 pages, exactly 2^64 bytes, which cannot be | ||
| ;; allocated (and whose byte size does not even fit in 64 bits). Instantiation | ||
| ;; must fail as a host limit, not wrap the size to zero and then spuriously | ||
| ;; trap on the active segment (which optimizations may legitimately remove, | ||
| ;; changing the spurious behavior). | ||
| (module | ||
| ;; CHECK: [host limit memory too large] | ||
| (memory $0 i64 281474976710656 281474976710656 shared) | ||
| (data $0 (i64.const 0) "\00") | ||
| ) |
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
That works for validated modules: as we established on #8882, under the validator's bound the only value the shift can wrap to is exactly 0. The round trip form additionally stays correct for modules that skipped validation (
--no-validation), where an out of rangeinitialcan wrap to a nonzero value that!byteswould silently accept as a real size. Since both compile to the same couple of instructions I kept the self contained one, but happy to switch if @kripken prefers the shorter form.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.
We can assume that modules being executed are valid. The only place a module might be invalid is during parsing, basically. But I think the current code is clearer as it stands, as it is self-contained - the short form would need a longer comment, in my opinion.
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.
Also, the validation limit might change if the spec changes, in theory...