Rename `wasm32-wasi-preview1-threads` to `wasm32-wasip1-threads`

[alexcrichton]

This commit renames the current wasm32-wasi-preview1-threads target to wasm32-wasip1-threads. The need for this rename is a bit unfortunate as the previous name was chosen in an attempt to be future-compatible with other WASI targets. Originally this target was proposed to be wasm32-wasi-threads, and that's what was originally implemented in wasi-sdk as well. After discussion though and with the plans for the upcoming component-model target (now named wasm32-wasip2) the "preview1" naming was chosen for the threads-based target. The WASI subgroup later decided that it was time to drop the "preview" terminology and recommends "pX" instead, hence previous PRs to add wasm32-wasip2 and rename wasm32-wasi to wasm32-wasip1.

So, with all that history, the "proper name" for this target is different than its current name, so one way or another a rename is required. This PR proposes renaming this target cold-turkey, unlike wasm32-wasi which is having a long transition period to change its name. The threads-based target is predicted to see only a fraction of the traffic of wasm32-wasi due to the unstable nature of the WASI threads proposal itself.

While I was here I updated the in-tree documentation in the target spec file itself as most of the documentation was copied from the original WASI target and wasn't as applicable to this target.

Also, as an aside, I can at least try to apologize for all the naming confusion here, but this is hopefully the last WASI-related rename.

[rustbot]

r? @petrochenkov

rustbot has assigned @petrochenkov. They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

[rustbot]

These commits modify compiler targets. (See the Target Tier Policy.)

[alexcrichton]

cc @g0djan, @abrown, @loganek, the other maintainers of this target

[petrochenkov]

(I'll wait until the other target maintainers respond something before approving.)

[abrown]

This makes sense to me — it's more clear to users what ABI they're using.

[loganek]

I'm ok with this change too.

[g0djan]

Sounds good to me

[bors]

:umbrella: The latest upstream changes (presumably #122305) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

[alexcrichton]

@rustbot ready

[petrochenkov]

@bors r+

[bors]

:pushpin: Commit e1e9d38f5851694d9901cc5e71d84d5e7404b555 has been approved by petrochenkov

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[workingjubilee]

@bors rollup=iffy

[bors]

:hourglass: Testing commit e1e9d38f5851694d9901cc5e71d84d5e7404b555 with merge 5b7343b96681c93f6fe752b46d9427f9dee8f94b...

[bors]

:sunny: Test successful - checks-actions Approved by: petrochenkov Pushing 5b7343b96681c93f6fe752b46d9427f9dee8f94b to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (5b7343b96681c93f6fe752b46d9427f9dee8f94b): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.8%	[-3.8%, -3.8%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 670.966s -> 672.558s (0.24%) Artifact size: 310.09 MiB -> 309.99 MiB (-0.03%)