memfd: make "dense image" heuristic limit configurable.

[cfallin]

In #3820 we see an issue with the new heuristics that control use of
memfd: it's entirely possible for a reasonable Wasm module produced by a
snapshotting system to have a relatively sparse heap (less than 50%
filled). A system that avoids memfd because of this would have an
undesirable performance reduction on such modules.

Ultimately we should try to implement a hybrid scheme where we support
outlier/leftover initializers, but for now this PR makes the "always
allow dense" limit configurable. This way, embedders that want to ensure
that memfd is used can do so, if they have other knowledge about the
maximum heap size allowed in their system.

(Partially addresses #3820 but let's leave it open to track the hybrid
idea)

[github-actions]

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @peterhuene

Details

This issue or pull request has been labeled: "wasmtime:api", "wasmtime:config"

Thus the following users have been cc'd because of the following labels:

• peterhuene: wasmtime:api

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this label, edit the .github/subscribe-to-label.json configuration file.

Learn more.

[github-actions]

Label Messager: wasmtime:config

It looks like you are changing Wasmtime's configuration options. Make sure to
complete this check list:

• If you added a new Config method, you wrote extensive documentation for
  it.

  Details

  Our documentation should be of the following form:

  Short, simple summary sentence.
  
  More details. These details can be multiple paragraphs. There should be
  information about not just the method, but its parameters and results as
  well.
  
  Is this method fallible? If so, when can it return an error?
  
  Can this method panic? If so, when does it panic?
  
  # Example
  
  Optional example here.
  

• If you added a new Config method, or modified an existing one, you
  ensured that this configuration is exercised by the fuzz targets.

  Details

  For example, if you expose a new strategy for allocating the next instance
  slot inside the pooling allocator, you should ensure that at least one of our
  fuzz targets exercises that new strategy.

  Often, all that is required of you is to ensure that there is a knob for this
  configuration option in wasmtime_fuzzing::Config (or one
  of its nested structs).

  Rarely, this may require authoring a new fuzz target to specifically test this
  configuration. See our docs on fuzzing for more details.

• If you are enabling a configuration option by default, make sure that it
  has been fuzzed for at least two weeks before turning it on by default.

---

Details

To modify this label's message, edit the .github/label-messager/wasmtime-config.md file.

To add new label messages or remove existing label messages, edit the
.github/label-messager.json configuration file.

Learn more.

[alexcrichton]

Seems reasonable to me! While you're at it mind updating the fuzzer to, when enabling memfd, also use some of the input fuzz data to configure this field?

[alexcrichton]

Also, while you're at it, want to bump the 1mb limit if that seems too small as a default?

[cfallin]

Done! And this is going to need a rebase over the memfd -> memory_init_cow rename so I'll wait for your changes in #3825 to land first then get this in.

[github-actions]

Subscribe to Label Action

cc @fitzgen

Details

This issue or pull request has been labeled: "fuzzing"

Thus the following users have been cc'd because of the following labels:

• fitzgen: fuzzing

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this label, edit the .github/subscribe-to-label.json configuration file.

Learn more.