WebAssembly / WebAssembly/threads
atomic.fence validation and binary encoding
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- WebAssembly
- Stars
- 767
- Forks
- 54
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
After the last CG, we agreed to add atomic.fence.
Validation-wise, the instruction has type ([] -> []). Unlike other atomic.* instructions, it is not a validation error for the instruction to occur in a module with a non-shared memory. This is because the instruction fences all memories in the store, not just that of the current module.
Encoding-wise, I hope someone with better intuition about the binary format can suggest something.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the atomic.fence requirements in the issue: its type is ([] -> []) and it must be valid in modules without shared memory. Review the WebAssembly binary format conventions and propose an agreed encoding; done means both validation behavior and encoding are specified.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- wasm
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100