WebAssembly ABI mismatch between clang and rust

[tomaka]

When I compile this C code to wasm32-wasi:

typedef struct Vector {
    int a;
    int b;
} Vector;

extern int extract_a(Vector v) {
    return v.a;
}

And this Rust code to wasm32-wasi:

#[repr(C)]
struct Vector {
    a: i32,
    b: i32,
}

extern "C" {
    fn extract_a(v: Vector) -> i32;
}

fn main() {
    unsafe {
        extract_a(Vector { a: 5, b: 4 });
    }
}

And try link them together, I'm getting linking errors:

  = note: lld: error: function signature mismatch: extract_a
          >>> defined as (i32, i32) -> i32 in /home/pierre/Projets/wasm-abi-test/target/wasm32-wasi/debug/deps/wasm_abi_test.67xpw7l331r9o5x.rcgu.o
          >>> defined as (i32) -> i32 in /home/pierre/Projets/wasm-abi-test/target/wasm32-wasi/debug/build/wasm-abi-test-9c49ce7f6c5ca031/out/libfoo.a(test.o)

It seems that, according to clang, passing a struct by value should inline the fields, while for Rust it should be passed by pointer.

I uploaded an example project here: https://github.com/tomaka/wasm-abi-test
It can be built with something like:

AR_wasm32_wasi=/path/to/wasi-sdk-10.0/bin/ar CC_wasm32_wasi=/path/to/wasi-sdk-10.0/bin/clang cargo run --target=wasm32-wasi

Rust version: rustc 1.44.0-nightly (38114ff 2020-03-21)

[tomaka]

Apparently this is a known issue:

• Pass small structs in parameters instead of memory WebAssembly/tool-conventions#88 (comment)
• Clang and Rustc use incompatible Wasm signatures for struct arguments passed by value WebAssembly/tool-conventions#130

[TheBlueMatt]

This is mostly tracked at rustwasm/team#291 and would be fixed by #79998.

[TheBlueMatt]

This should now work for wasm32-wasi (on current git head).

[programmerjake]

Note that #83763 changed the default, so only wasm32-unknown-unknown uses the mismatched ABI, all other wasm targets (including custom targets) now default to using the ABI that matches clang:

rust/compiler/rustc_target/src/spec/wasm32_unknown_unknown.rs

Lines 22 to 30 in 482a3d0

	// This is a default for backwards-compatibility with the original
	// definition of this target oh-so-long-ago. Once the "wasm" ABI is
	// stable and the wasm-bindgen project has switched to using it then there's
	// no need for this and it can be removed.
	//
	// Currently this is the reason that this target's ABI is mismatched with
	// clang's ABI. This means that, in the limit, you can't merge C and Rust
	// code on this target due to this ABI mismatch.
	options.default_adjusted_cabi = Some(Abi::Wasm);

[temeddix]

There are discussions going on at wasm-bindgen to extend the support to wasm32-wasi in addition to the current wasm32-unknown-unknown.

• WASI support rustwasm/wasm-bindgen#3421
• Align with the "C" ABI rustwasm/wasm-bindgen#3454

In short, wasm-bindgen needs a consistent C ABI between wasm32-unknown-unknown and wasm32-wasi to support both of them.

Note that #83763 changed the default, so only wasm32-unknown-unknown uses the mismatched ABI, all other wasm targets (including custom targets) now default to using the ABI that matches clang:

rust/compiler/rustc_target/src/spec/wasm32_unknown_unknown.rs

Lines 22 to 30 in 482a3d0

	// This is a default for backwards-compatibility with the original
	// definition of this target oh-so-long-ago. Once the "wasm" ABI is
	// stable and the wasm-bindgen project has switched to using it then there's
	// no need for this and it can be removed.
	//
	// Currently this is the reason that this target's ABI is mismatched with
	// clang's ABI. This means that, in the limit, you can't merge C and Rust
	// code on this target due to this ABI mismatch.
	options.default_adjusted_cabi = Some(Abi::Wasm);

Can we have ABI that matches clang on wasm32-unknown-unknown as well? I can help with this, but would it be a hard task?

[bjorn3]

The change itself would be removing options.default_adjusted_cabi = Some(Abi::Wasm) from the target spec and that's it. Because it breaks older wasm-bindgen versions it will probably require waiting months to years before we can actually make this change. And preferably we would introduce a future compat warning for this change. Either against older wasm-bindgen versions or against any extern "C" function for which changing the abi actually has any effect.

[ranile]

I don't see why breaking older versions wasm-bindgen is a blocker when there can be a compatibility warning and it'll take over 12 weeks until stable if the change were to be merged today. Updating wasm-bindgen is as simple as just running cargo update -p wasm-bindgen, we can tell users to run it. wasm-bindgen is also semver 0.x so it makes no stability guarantees

It is unfortunate that we have to break code (that we never promised stability for) but the longer we wait, the worse the problem gets.

[temeddix]

I think so too, since the users don't need to refactor their code, this change doesn't need to be warned and waited.

[bjorn3]

We need to warn because it will breal everyone who uses an older wasm-bindgen version. We have done plenty of warnings and sometimes even crate version specific workaround in the past to avoid breakage even after a fixed crate version exists.

[temeddix]

We need to warn because it will breal everyone who uses an older wasm-bindgen version.

May I ask you what things would be broken and users should be aware of?

The reason this discussion started was basically major modules in std are not working in wasm32-unknown-unknown, making various crates be divided into wasm and non-wasm versions. Fixing this fragmentation in Rust ecosystem as soon as possible would be good, in my opinion. Maybe we can use a version-specific workaround as you mentioned.

One thing I'm concerned about is that this issue is being solved too slow. It's older than 3 years. I believe we need some momentum for this issue, or it will just be left unsolved even after 2026 or so..

[liamrosenfeld]

May I ask you what things would be broken and users should be aware of?

It'll break using a newer version of the rust compiler that has the fix alongside older versions of wasm-bindgen that expect the C abi to be different.

While this isn't a source breaking warning, it still requires user action to prevent breaking a build when updating one but not the other so it needs to be there.

[ranile]

As someone who hasn't contributed to rustc, how hard would this be to fix? I would like to give it a shot but I don't know where to even begin with this

[temeddix]

• rustc: Add a new wasm ABI #83763 (comment)

When the wasm ABI was added for compatibility, the author @alexcrichton said like this:

it would be nice for this to get stabilized (if it works) in the near-ish
future to remove the wasm32-unknown-unknown incompatibility with the C

...and that was two and a half years ago.

I heard that in the old days when Rust wasn't so mature, there were breaking changes here and there, and that was possible because the user pool was much smaller than now.

I believe if we hesitate, with the increasing Rust population who are adopting wasm Rust to their server/web code, it would get harder and harder to fix this later. I would argue that wasm-bindgen should figure out how to warn its users(as written in its issue).

[ranile]

wasm-bindgen can't warn because the issue would come up when using versions of wasm-bindgen that are already released. Newer versions would be fine.

We could back port the fix and have the crates.io team replace the published versions so every new build is unaffected. Not sure how feasible that is

[temeddix]

Or perhaps wasm-bindgen could possibly publish the final 0.2.x version that includes checking rustc version and warning the users, and go on to the 0.3.0-beta version that uses the wasm-compatible ABI with new MSRV.

Because wasm-bindgen is such a major crate, notifying the changes in README and docs would be effective for users out there.

[temeddix]

As someone who hasn't contributed to rustc, how hard would this be to fix? I would like to give it a shot but I don't know where to even begin with this

I'm not an expert either, but it looks like this part could be the starting point, @hamza1311 . This does look simple as mentioned in #71871 (comment)

rust/compiler/rustc_target/src/spec/wasm32_unknown_unknown.rs

Lines 20 to 28 in 9ab0749

	// This is a default for backwards-compatibility with the original
	// definition of this target oh-so-long-ago. Once the "wasm" ABI is
	// stable and the wasm-bindgen project has switched to using it then there's
	// no need for this and it can be removed.
	//
	// Currently this is the reason that this target's ABI is mismatched with
	// clang's ABI. This means that, in the limit, you can't merge C and Rust
	// code on this target due to this ABI mismatch.
	options.default_adjusted_cabi = Some(Abi::Wasm);

[ranile]

I'm not an expert either, but it looks like this part could be the starting point, @hamza1311 . This does look simple as mentioned in #71871 (comment)

rust/compiler/rustc_target/src/spec/wasm32_unknown_unknown.rs

Lines 20 to 28 in 9ab0749

	// This is a default for backwards-compatibility with the original
	// definition of this target oh-so-long-ago. Once the "wasm" ABI is
	// stable and the wasm-bindgen project has switched to using it then there's
	// no need for this and it can be removed.
	//
	// Currently this is the reason that this target's ABI is mismatched with
	// clang's ABI. This means that, in the limit, you can't merge C and Rust
	// code on this target due to this ABI mismatch.
	options.default_adjusted_cabi = Some(Abi::Wasm);

If wasm-bindgen sets an environment variable in its build script, will it be available at that point in the process? If it is, that pretty much solves the breaking change issue as we can only use the better C ABI if wasm-bindgen tells us it's fine to use it. It has the unfortunate consequence of requiring wasm-bindgen to use that ABI at the moment but we can remove the check once the adoption of a later version of wasm-bindgen is good enough that this isn't an issue

[bjorn3]

If wasm-bindgen sets an environment variable in its build script, will it be available at that point in the process?

No, it would only be available when compiling wasm-bindgen itself, but the extern "C" calls are generated by wasm-bindgen when compiling user code which wouldn't have those env vars set. It would also lead to issues when two crates interface using extern "C" but only one compiled with the env var set.

[ranile]

Does the environment variable set during a build script get unset after the crate compilation finishes? I haven't tested it but I don't think it should. If wasm-bindgen sets an environment variable then when its dependents are compiled, they'll also have that set, no?

It doesn't have to be an environment variable, just something to indicate what ABI it wants

[bjorn3]

Env vars set by a build script only apply to the package the build script is part of. So wasm-bindgen's build script would apply to libwasm_bindgen.rlib as well as all of it's examples and tests, but not to anything depending on wasm-bindgen.

[temeddix]

Looks like you're running your Rust code in Deno/nodejs/Browser with wasm32-unknown-unknown. I made some related post on the Rust forum, have a look:

• https://users.rust-lang.org/t/help-us-make-wasm-bindgen-support-wasm32-wasi-target/101718

Some people were suggesting that wasm32-unknown-unknown should be deprecated, because what it means is that the architecture is really 'unknown'. There were also people from other places making the same claims, which does make sense. I personally think that wasm32-unknown-unknown is not the way to go for the Rust community, and we should gradually move onto wasm32-wasi, leaving broken wasm32-unknown-unknown behind.

The biggest problem that wasm32-unknown-unknown has is that it doesn't support certain std modules, such as std::time::Instant, std::thread, std::fs. This makes the Rust ecosystem seriously fractured, as it forces various crates to make separated wasm and non-wasm versions(or at best, write the code twice). Take a look at rayon, for example:

• non-wasm: https://github.com/rayon-rs/rayon
• wasm: https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/wasm-bindgen-rayon

Of course, the misaligned C ABI is also a big problem of wasm32-unknown-unknown.

IMHO, wasm32-wasi could be the answer, even for JavaScript environment in Deno/nodejs/Browser. It has standard C ABI, and all of the std functionalities are enabled by default, just like native platforms. After Rust code is compiled to wasm32-wasi, browser shims like wasmer-js or browser_wasi_shim can handle WASI syscalls by interacting with JavaScript in Deno/nodejs/Browser. I might make a PR at wasm-pack that makes it use browser shims if I have time, but anyone can do it though.

wasm-bindgen was made compatible with wasm32-wasi on September, it's just not enabled yet, which also needs a PR:

• Make wasm-bindgen compatible with the standard C ABI rustwasm/wasm-bindgen#3595
• Disable support for wasm32-wasi rustwasm/wasm-bindgen#3233
• Align with the "C" ABI rustwasm/wasm-bindgen#3454 (comment)

[rpjohnst]

wasm32-wasi is not a full replacement for wasm32-unknown-unknown, because some applications cannot take a dependency on WASI. And these scenarios often need to use the C ABI! Really what should have happened here is for wasm32-unknown-unknown to be #[no_std]-only, at least to begin with, like the other -unknown targets, but that's not really something we can change now.

On the other hand, fixing the wasm32-unknown-unknown C ABI was always the plan. If there needs to be a deprecation period, or some way to opt out of or into the fix, fine- but locking wasm32-unknown-unknown into its current behavior is not an option in the first place, because its current "C ABI" (equivalent to other targets' extern "wasm") relies on unstable implementation details and was never designed for anything beyond primitives: #115666

[temeddix]

I think I can I re-open #117236, but would there be any attention from reviewers soon enough so that I can implement warnings for wasm-bindgen 0.2.x, from the Rust side?

To be honest, I need to get confirmation from wasm-bindgen maintainers that with the new C ABI, its version will be bumped up to 0.3.0 or something. I could not really reach the consensus because not enough people were responding in the PR.

[Liamolucko]

To be honest, I need to get confirmation from wasm-bindgen maintainers that with the new C ABI, its version will be bumped up to 0.3.0 or something. I could not really reach the consensus because not enough people were responding in the PR.

We're not going to release a version 0.3.0 over this, it's not a breaking change and so there's no need to break compatibility with the ecosystem of crates using 0.2.x for no reason. wasm-bindgen is still fully compatible with the old C ABI, it just also supports the new one now. The warning can just be for versions of wasm-bindgen prior to 0.2.88, there's no need for it to be all 0.2.x versions.

[ranile]

I agree. We should warn for versions <0.2.88, no need for 0.3.x just for this issue. Technically nothing in wasm-bindgen is broken so there's no need for a semver breaking version

[daxpedda]

We need to warn because it will breal everyone who uses an older wasm-bindgen version. We have done plenty of warnings and sometimes even crate version specific workaround in the past to avoid breakage even after a fixed crate version exists.

I was looking into how to tackle this, but couldn't really find any past work except some specific proc-macro rental crate warnings. If there is anything else, could you point me into that direction @bjorn3?

Is there any accepted way to do something like that? I was thinking of just making a new lint and add it to the future-incompatible group.

[bjorn3]

I was looking into how to tackle this, but couldn't really find any past work except some specific proc-macro rental crate warnings.

There have been a couple of that kind of hacks in the past. In any case this is what I meant.

Is there any accepted way to do something like that? I was thinking of just making a new lint and add it to the future-incompatible group.

I believe that is the intended way for adding this kind of lint.

[RalfJung]

How does this issue relate to #115666? Here it seems rustc is passing things by-ref when it should be passed by-val, but in #115666 we have the issue that rustc passes things by-val in the wrong way. So that seems like it is a separate issue, but I would assume they are somehow entangled?

[Liamolucko]

How does this issue relate to #115666? Here it seems rustc is passing things by-ref when it should be passed by-val, but in #115666 we have the issue that rustc passes things by-val in the wrong way. So that seems like it is a separate issue, but I would assume they are somehow entangled?

The original comment has it backwards, Rust is passing things by-value when it should be passing them by-ref the same as #115666. You can see that the function with signature (i32, i32) -> i32 is coming from target/.../deps (i.e. Rust code) and the function with signature (i32) -> i32 is coming from target/.../build (i.e. C code).

[RalfJung]

Ah I see. Someone please update that comment then. :)

[ranile]

One idea I had is to move to C-ABI with an edition boundary (in 2024 edition). I would be happy to work on a PR for this, if we want it. This way we can avoid a forced breaking change and let users update wasm-bindgen as they migrate to 2024 edition

CC: @bjorn3 @daxpedda thought?

[daxpedda]

I'm not sure how that would work because we are talking about a compile feature and not a language one.
So it would depend on the edition of the "root crate"? I'm unfamiliar with the architecture here, but wouldn't that also require changes in Cargo to identify the "root crate"?

EDIT: But if it can be done it would be a very nice solution.

[Liamolucko]

I'm not sure how that would work because we are talking about a compile feature and not a language one. So it would depend on the edition of the "root crate"? I'm unfamiliar with the architecture here, but wouldn't that also require changes in Cargo to identify the "root crate"?

It feels a bit questionable to apply the change to all crates based on one crate's edition, since half the point of editions is that you can mix crates written against different editions without the older-edition crates being impacted. It'd also be possible for someone to update their root crate to the 2024 edition while still using a pre-0.2.88 version of wasm-bindgen and have it break.

Doing it on a crate-by-crate basis wouldn't work either though, since then an extern "C" function defined in a 2021-edition crate wouldn't work when called from a 2024-edition crate.

[RalfJung]

Yeah this can't be done over an edition. We're going to have to do a breaking change at some point.