Open
Conversation
Collaborator
Author
|
I'll clean up the history on this branch later of course, pardon! Very much a WIP that I wanted to get online while I figure out the questions above. |
|
What is needed to get this fix in? |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Parse Threaded Modules
🚧 WIP 🚧
Fixes #326.
This continues the work from #365.
First, a reduced test fixture based on the repro posted in the original issue here:
After building the
.wasmfile withwat2wasm --enable-bulk-memory --enable-threads, we have a44byte file, with the following header sizes:And we can print sizes without a
should not parse the same key into multiple itemspanic!Question: Note that twiggy says the data count section is 3 bytes, but
wasm-objdumpsays 1 byte. When I print the full contents like so:It does seem to be a size of 1, so I'm inclined to think this isn't a complete fix yet. That said, the code section starts at
1d, so I'm curious if this is just an alignment issue of some sort.