Thanks! On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 3:22 Filip Pizlo <fpi...@apple.com> wrote:
> I don’t like this proposal. > > If we are running low on memory, we should switch to bounds checked memory. > How about using bound checking mode exclusively for low environment? > -Filip > > > On Aug 28, 2018, at 11:21 AM, Yusuke Suzuki <yusukesuz...@slowstart.org> > wrote: > > Posted this mail to webkit-dev mailing list too :) > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 3:19 AM Yusuke Suzuki <yusukesuz...@slowstart.org> > wrote: > >> Hi JSC folks, >> >> In Wasm supported environment, our MemoryMode is a bit dynamic. >> When we fail to allocate WasmMemory for signaling mode, we fall back to >> the bound checking memory instead. >> >> But Wasm code compiled for signaling / bound checking is incompatible. If >> the code is compiled >> as signaling mode, and if we attach the memory for bound checking, we >> need to recompile the >> code for bound checking mode. This introduces significant complexity to >> our wasm compilation. >> And our WebAssembly.compile is not basically compiling: it is just >> validating. >> Actual compiling needs to be deferred until the memory is attached by >> instantiating. >> It is not good when we would like to share WasmModule among multiple wasm >> threads / workers in the future, since the "compiled" Wasm module is not >> actually compiled. >> >> So, my proposal is, can we explore the way to exclusively support one of >> MemoryMode in a certain architecture? >> For example, in x64, enable signaling mode, and we report OOM errors if >> we fail to allocate WasmMemory with signaling mode. >> >> Best regards, >> Yusuke Suzuki >> > _______________________________________________ > webkit-dev mailing list > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev > > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
