Cache worker lowers the priority of the whole process on macOS
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.
Evaluación
- Dificultad
- 4/5
- Tiempo estimado
- 3-5 días
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 35/100
- Tipo de issue
- Error
- Claridad
- Bien especificado
- Estado de actividad
- Activo
- Stack tecnológico
- linux, macos, rust
- Área
- backend, performance
Línea de trabajo
Start with crates/cache/src/worker.rs and inspect WorkerThread::lower_thread_priority and its platform-specific branches. Check the priority APIs used on Linux, Android, Apple targets, and other Unix targets, then add or run a test that verifies cache worker startup does not lower the macOS process priority. Done means the worker priority is handled per the platform behavior described in the issue, without changing the host process priority.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Descripción
Problem
WorkerThread::lower_thread_priority in crates/cache/src/worker.rs calls
rustix::process::nice(3) on every target other than Windows and Fuchsia. The
intent is to lower the priority of the cache worker thread only.
On Linux, nice changes only the calling thread, so the code does what it
intends. On macOS, nice and setpriority(PRIO_PROCESS, 0, ...) change the
whole process. Apple's setpriority(2) man page states: "The setpriority()
call sets the priorities of all of the specified processes to the specified
value", where who = 0 denotes the current process. Thread-level control on
macOS uses PRIO_DARWIN_THREAD or the pthread QoS API, not PRIO_PROCESS.
As a result, each Cache (each one starts its own worker thread) adds 3 to
the nice value of the whole embedding process. All threads of the process and
every child process that it spawns after that inherit the value. An
unprivileged process cannot lower its nice value again.
The other BSDs also apply nice per process, as far as I know. I tested
only macOS.
Steps to Reproduce
[dependencies]
libc = "0.2"
wasmtime = { version = "50.0.1", default-features = false, features = ["cache", "cranelift", "runtime", "wat"] }
use wasmtime::{Cache, CacheConfig, Config, Engine, Module, Result};
fn process_nice() -> i32 {
unsafe { libc::getpriority(libc::PRIO_PROCESS, 0) }
}
fn main() -> Result<()> {
println!("nice before engine: {}", process_nice());
let mut cache_config = CacheConfig::new();
cache_config.with_directory(std::env::temp_dir().join("cache-nice-repro"));
let mut config = Config::new();
config.cache(Some(Cache::new(cache_config)?));
let engine = Engine::new(&config)?;
Module::new(&engine, "(module)")?;
std::thread::sleep(std::time::Duration::from_millis(500));
println!("nice after engine: {}", process_nice());
let child = std::process::Command::new("sh").args(["-c", "ps -o nice= -p $$"]).output()?;
print!("child process nice: {}", String::from_utf8_lossy(&child.stdout));
Ok(())
}
Expected Results
nice before engine: 0
nice after engine: 0
child process nice: 0
Actual Results
nice before engine: 0
nice after engine: 3
child process nice: 3
Impact
Any host that enables the cache on macOS is affected, also indirectly. For
example, a host that embeds Extism with its default cache configuration and
creates five or six engines runs at nice 15 to 18. Every process that the
host starts, such as dev servers and test runners, then also runs at nice 15
to 18, and the user cannot undo it without root. With the cache turned off,
the host stays at nice 0.
Versions and Environment
Wasmtime version or commit: main at 33b89be (the same code is in v50.0.1)
Operating system: macOS 27.0.1
Architecture: aarch64
Proposed fix
- Linux and Android: keep
nice(3), which is per thread there. - Apple targets: call
pthread_set_qos_class_self_np(QOS_CLASS_UTILITY, 0),
which changes only the calling thread. - Other Unix targets: do not change the priority, and write a debug log.
The Fuchsia branch is already a no-op in the same way.
I have a PR ready with this change and a test.
- Lenguaje dominante
- Rust
- Estrellas
- 18.8k
- Forks
- 1.9k
- Merge medio
- 1 d 3 h
- PR fusionados (30 d)
- 380
Preparar el entorno
- Sin Dockerfile ni archivo de Docker Compose
- Tiene una plantilla de pull request
- Leer la guía de contribución
Primeros pasos
- Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
- Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
- Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
- Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.
Más de bytecodealliance/wasmtime
-
Cranelift: interpreter: incorrect edge-case handling in fcvt_to_{u,s}int.i128Posiblemente ocupada @ryancbuckley la tomó hoy. Abiertobug cranelift
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 83/100
bytecodealliance/wasmtime#15198 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
bug wasm-proposal:exceptions wasmtime:debugging
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 76/100
bytecodealliance/wasmtime#14102 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
wasm-proposal:gc
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 62/100
bytecodealliance/wasmtime#13808 · 2 comentarios ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 4/5 3-5 días Aptitud para principiantes 48/100
bytecodealliance/wasmtime#15195 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 1/5 Menos de una hora Aptitud para principiantes 20/100
bytecodealliance/wasmtime#15193 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
Todos los issues de bytecodealliance/wasmtime
Issues similares
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 82/100
RustCrypto/utils#1597 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 68/100
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Non-`main` default branchesAbierto
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 68/100
max-sixty/worktrunk#4727 · 7 comentarios · 1 reacción ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 86/100
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día
-
follow-up
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 73/100
carrick-sh/carrick#1859 ·
Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día