Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

gh-126691: Remove --with-emscripten-target #126787

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hoodmane
Copy link
Contributor

@hoodmane hoodmane commented Nov 13, 2024

This unifies the code for nodejs and the code for the browser. After this commit, the browser example doesn't work because I deleted the code to copy the files around. However, I have a fix for this prepared as a followup.


📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--126787.org.readthedocs.build/

This unifies the code for nodejs and the code for the browser. After this
commit, the browser example doesn't work. However, I have a fix for it prepared
as a followup.
Copy link
Contributor

@mdboom mdboom left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

Copy link
Contributor

@freakboy3742 freakboy3742 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this all makes sense; a couple of minor suggestions and requests for clarification inline. Those clarifications are mostly for my own edification - I'm still getting familiar with the internals of emscripten as a platform, so I want to make sure that I understand what is going on.

[LIBRARY_DEPS='$(PY3LIBRARY) $(EXPORTSYMS)']
)
LIBRARY_DEPS='$(PY3LIBRARY) $(EXPORTSYMS)'

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The implication here would be that the python.worker.js script is no longer required - Can it be deleted?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm going to update it a tiny bit, add a separate make target, and move it into Tools/wasm/emscripten/web_example in a followup. I'd prefer to leave it alone for now to avoid creating git blame churn.

Module.preRun = () => {
FS.mkdirTree("/lib/");
FS.mount(NODEFS, { root: __dirname + "/lib/" }, "/lib/");
};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a reason this wasn't needed previously?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With -sNODERAWFS, the emulated file system is set up to match the native file system as closely as possible. So this is automatic. Now that we are not doing that, we need to mount the standard library so that the Python interpreter will start up. Ideally we'd be able to select whether or not to use -sNODERAWFS at runtime, but it's a node only option.

I think in a followup I'll update it to mount most of the native file system directories. But I want to change the way a few more things work first (and there are some bugs that make this a bit weirder than it could be emscripten-core/emscripten#22924).

]
)
AS_VAR_APPEND([LDFLAGS_NODIST], [" --pre-js=\$(srcdir)/Tools/wasm/emscripten/node_pre.js"])
WASM_LINKFORSHARED_DEBUG="-gseparate-dwarf --emit-symbol-map"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For my own edification - the summary of this set of changes is that we can essentially use the node compilation options everywhere:

  • The --preload-file is not longer required;
  • The os.py replacement in the standard library is no longer required;
  • We don't need the -sALLOW_MEMORY_GROWTH, -sNODERAWFS and -sEXIT_RUNTIME flags any more
  • -gseparate-dwarf now presumably works in Chrome Devtools.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@hoodmane hoodmane Nov 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah:

--preload-file

It is easy to use but it produces files in an ad-hoc file format that Emscripten made. We prefer to use tar or zip files, though it requires a tiny bit more setup. In Node, the plan is to use the NODEFS to mount the standard lib, see above. In the browser, we'll zip the standard library into python314.zip and put it in the file system at /lib/python314.zip then allow it to be imported via the zip importer.

os.py

Not really sure what this was for to be honest. Removing it doesn't cause any test failures as far as I can tell?

-sALLOW_MEMORY_GROWTH

It was a mistake to remove this, I think it will cause additional test failures.

-sNODERAWFS

It's incompatible with browsers so we can't use it if we want to share one build for both.

-sEXIT_RUNTIME

Well. I'm not actually sure on this one to be honest:

If 0, the runtime is not quit when main() completes (allowing code to run
afterwards, for example from the browser main event loop). atexit()s are also
not executed, and we can avoid including code for runtime shutdown, like
flushing the stdio streams. Set this to 1 if you do want atexit()s or stdio
streams to be flushed on exit.

It seems potentially helpful. I'm not sure what happens if you use exit_with_live_runtime() with -sEXIT_RUNTIME. My main reason for removing was that Pyodide doesn't pass it. But I think it'd be better to put it back for now and see what it does.

-gseparate-dwarf

Yes, it works in chrome devtools now. I'm a bit unclear also on why it was used in node before but not in chrome -- when I debug node, I go to chrome://inspect and click "Open dedicated DevTools for Node" so... yeah I thought the node debugger is chrome devtools too...

@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-app bot commented Nov 14, 2024

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
awaiting changes build The build process and cross-build OS-emscripten
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants