cranelift: Support calling functions with vmctx arguments
#6663
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
This is a leftover from bytecodealliance#3302 where we used to inject a special `vmctx` struct if the test requested it. We've removed that capability in bytecodealliance#5386 but accidentally left this in, which caused some weird handling of these test invocations.
afonso360
requested review from
cfallin and
fitzgen
and removed request for
a team and
cfallin
|
I'm going to open a separate issue about supporting stack_limit in the interpreter. Edit: Actually I'm going to work on this, I'll send a PR when it's ready |
fitzgen
approved these changes
Jun 28, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This is a leftover from #3302 where we used to inject a special
vmctxstruct if the test requested it. We've removed that capability in #5386 but accidentally left this in, which caused some weird handling of these test invocations.Fixes #6659