firefox's low-latency webassembly compiler
> The goals of high throughput and low latency conflict with each other. To get best throughput, a compiler needs to spend time on code motion, register allocation, and instruction selection; to get low latency, that’s exactly what a compiler should not do. Web browsers therefore take a two-pronged approach: they have a compiler optimized for throughput, and a compiler optimized for latency. As a WebAssembly file is being downloaded, it is first compiled by the quick-and-dirty low-latency compiler, with the goal of producing machine code as soon as possible. After that “baseline” compiler has run, the “optimizing” compiler works in the background to produce high-throughput code. The optimizing compiler can take more time because it runs on a separate thread. When the optimizing compiler is done, it replaces the baseline code. (The actual heuristics about whether to do baseline + optimizing (“tiering“) or just to go straight to the optimizing compiler are a bit hairy, but this is a summary.)
> This article is about the WebAssembly baseline compiler in Firefox. It’s a surprising bit of code and I learned a few things from it.
The Bytecode Alliance: Building a secure, composable future for WebAssembly
> We have a vision of a WebAssembly ecosystem that is secure by default, fixing cracks in today’s software foundations. And based on advances rapidly emerging in the WebAssembly community, we believe we can make this vision real.
> WebAssembly can provide the kind of isolation that makes it safe to run untrusted code. We can have an architecture that’s like Unix’s many small processes, or like containers and microservices. But this isolation is much lighter weight, and the communication between them isn’t much slower than a regular function call. This means you can use them to wrap a single WebAssembly module instance, or a small collection of module instances that want to share things like memory among themselves.
Standardizing WASI: A system interface to run WebAssembly outside the web
> WebAssembly is an assembly language for a conceptual machine, not a physical one. This is why it can be run across a variety of different machine architectures.
> Just as WebAssembly is an assembly language for a conceptual machine, WebAssembly needs a system interface for a conceptual operating system, not any single operating system. This way, it can be run across all different OSs.
> This is what WASI is — a system interface for the WebAssembly platform.
WebAssembly Is Not a Stack Machine
> This poses a problem for optimisation.
Maybe you don't need Rust and WASM to speed up your JS
Chrome OS exploit: WebAsm, Site Isolation, crosh, crash reporter, cryptohomed
Tons of fun stuff going on here.
> Imports can be getters, which run while the instance is being built and is not in a consistent state. If the getter builds another instance for the same module, then the instances will share a WasmCompiledModule, but will have different ArrayBuffers for memory. Compiled module will reference one memory buffer. If the second memory grows, then the compiled module gets confused and relocates to OOB memory.
> war-extension to crosh with process limit
> network_diag has an awk command injection bug.
> lamecalc should open again
Goodbye PNaCl, Hello WebAssembly!
> We will remove support for PNaCl in the first quarter of 2018 everywhere except inside Chrome Apps and Extensions. We believe that the ecosystem around WebAssembly makes it a better fit for new and existing high-performance web apps, and that usage of PNaCl is sufficiently low to warrant deprecation.
A cartoon intro to WebAssembly
> WebAssembly is fast. You’ve probably heard this. But what is it that makes WebAssembly fast? In this series, I want to explain to you why WebAssembly is fast.