[wasm] `Loader/classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04/case04.sh` failing with `FAIL: object and non-object field overlap was not detected`

[radical]

Rolling build, and Log

    Loader/classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04/case04.sh [FAIL]
      
      Return code:      1
      Raw output file:      /datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/w/ABAB093F/uploads/Reports/Loader.classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04/case04.output.txt
      Raw output:
      BEGIN EXECUTION
      Microsoft (R) Build Engine version 17.0.0+c9eb9dd64 for .NET
      Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
      
        AppDir: /datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/w/ABAB093F/e/Loader/classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04/WasmApp/
        TestBinDir: /datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/w/ABAB093F/e/Loader/classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04
        ArtifactsBinDir: 
      /datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/p/build/WasmApp.targets(210,5): warning : Could not find $(AssemblyName)=WasmTestRunner.dll in the assemblies to be bundled. [/datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/p/wasm-test-runner/WasmTestRunner.proj]
      Incoming arguments: --run case04.dll
      Application arguments: --run case04.dll
      console.debug: mono_wasm_runtime_ready fe00e07a-5519-4dfe-b35a-f867dbaf2e28
      console.info: Initializing.....
      FAIL: object and non-object field overlap was not detected
      Expected: 100
      Actual: 101
      END EXECUTION - FAILED

IIUC, this is a new test that was added in #61467 . cc @simonrozsival

FYI, the diff from the previous passing rolling build - https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/compare/a61c1a3c..ad9979381706d1976e4d26e13cb88d6147264968

And it slipped through because we are not running the wasm/RuntimeTests on PRs. @lewing @steveisok Should we enable them for wasm on PRs? Or maybe based on some path changes?

Tagging subscribers to 'arch-wasm': @lewing
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

---

Rolling build, and Log

    Loader/classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04/case04.sh [FAIL]
      
      Return code:      1
      Raw output file:      /datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/w/ABAB093F/uploads/Reports/Loader.classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04/case04.output.txt
      Raw output:
      BEGIN EXECUTION
      Microsoft (R) Build Engine version 17.0.0+c9eb9dd64 for .NET
      Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
      
        AppDir: /datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/w/ABAB093F/e/Loader/classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04/WasmApp/
        TestBinDir: /datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/w/ABAB093F/e/Loader/classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04
        ArtifactsBinDir: 
      /datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/p/build/WasmApp.targets(210,5): warning : Could not find $(AssemblyName)=WasmTestRunner.dll in the assemblies to be bundled. [/datadisks/disk1/work/A3F40905/p/wasm-test-runner/WasmTestRunner.proj]
      Incoming arguments: --run case04.dll
      Application arguments: --run case04.dll
      console.debug: mono_wasm_runtime_ready fe00e07a-5519-4dfe-b35a-f867dbaf2e28
      console.info: Initializing.....
      FAIL: object and non-object field overlap was not detected
      Expected: 100
      Actual: 101
      END EXECUTION - FAILED

IIUC, this is a new test that was added in #61467 . cc @simonrozsival

FYI, the diff from the previous passing rolling build - https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/compare/a61c1a3c..ad9979381706d1976e4d26e13cb88d6147264968

And it slipped through because we are not running the wasm/RuntimeTests on PRs. @lewing @steveisok Should we enable them for wasm on PRs? Or maybe based on some path changes?

Author:	radical
Assignees:	-
Labels:	arch-wasm
Milestone:	-

I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this issue. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label.

[lambdageek]

Let's disable the test on wasm for now. Nevermind - I added a PR to make the test work on wasm.

@simonrozsival wasm is 32-bit. Maybe this test only has overlapping fields on 64-bit platforms?

[lambdageek]

Yea this field doesn't actually overlap the object on a 32-bit arch

runtime/src/tests/Loader/classloader/explicitlayout/NestedStructs/case04.cs

Line 30 in b83fee9

[FieldOffset(6)]

[simonrozsival]

@lambdageek Yes, that should be the problem. In the other tests the conflicting fields have the same explicit field offset. In case04 I intentionally used different offsets and I didn't notice that it behaves differently on 32 bit platforms. Thanks for fixing it!