Skip to content

Conversation

@kripken
Copy link
Member

@kripken kripken commented Feb 14, 2024

Fuzzing Asyncify has a significant cost both in terms of the complexity in
the fuzzer and the slowness of the fuzzing. In practice it was useful years ago
when Asyncify was written but hasn't found anything for a while, and Asyncify
is really deprecated given JSPI. For all those reasons, remove it from the fuzzer.

We do still have lots of normal coverage of asyncify in lit tests, unit tests, and
the Emscripten test suite.

Removing this will also make future improvements to the fuzzer simpler.

@kripken kripken requested review from aheejin and tlively February 14, 2024 22:06
Copy link
Member

@tlively tlively left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice!

@kripken kripken merged commit feb8f24 into WebAssembly:main Feb 14, 2024
@kripken kripken deleted the nofuzz.asyncify branch February 14, 2024 23:54
radekdoulik pushed a commit to dotnet/binaryen that referenced this pull request Jul 12, 2024
Fuzzing Asyncify has a significant cost both in terms of the complexity in
the fuzzer and the slowness of the fuzzing. In practice it was useful years ago
when Asyncify was written but hasn't found anything for a while, and Asyncify
is really deprecated given JSPI. For all those reasons, remove it from the fuzzer.

We do still have lots of normal coverage of asyncify in lit tests, unit tests, and
the Emscripten test suite.

Removing this will also make future improvements to the fuzzer simpler.
@gkdn gkdn mentioned this pull request Aug 31, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants