feat: Add --release flag to wasm_builder

[aoyako]

Context

Resolves #5202

Problem

The current version of iroha_wasm_builder has a --release flag set by default for its output.
The input --optimize flag can be set that will apply -O -Os.
Still, it cannot produce a build in debug mode.

Solution

Changes in iroha_wasm_builder

This PR introduces a single flag --release that:

• When set, apply --release -O -Os to the build.
• When not set, produce a debug build.

Changes in build_wasm.sh

Now, build_wasm.sh produces a debug build by default. Flag --release can be added to build in optimized mode.

Checklist

• I've read CONTRIBUTING.md.
• (optional) I've written unit tests for the code changes.
• All review comments have been resolved.
• All CI checks pass.

[s8sato]

Let's reject invalid args so that we don't type e.g. --releas lib and get unintended results

[aoyako]

Changed to --profile={deploy, profiling} and --target={samples, libs}

[s8sato]

Regarding whether named or position-based, either is acceptable but I personally prefer the shorter one

[s8sato]

I think some CI workflows should keep --release build, at least iroha2-release.yml and maybe iroha2-custom-image.yml @BAStos525 ?

[mversic]

• it should definitely be release for iroha2-release.yml
• for the custom image it should use the PROFILE variable

[BAStos525]

In iroha2-release.yml we use the tag taken from github.ref_name - it's the tag name. Should any changes be introduced?

[s8sato]

Only *.wasm quality is discussed here, which would only affect e.g. this line

[aoyako]

CI will use release due to the need for additional resources (memory, fuel) and adjusted timeouts. Nevertheless, the debug flag can be set when building WASM.

[mversic]

CI will use release due to the need for additional resources (memory, fuel) and adjusted timeouts. Nevertheless, the debug flag can be set when building WASM.

I would like CI to use test when testing things and release (or deploy) when deploying. Yes, this will require you to adjust timeouts and limits in the test_network (don't modify parameters in genesis.json)

[mversic]

this was good as it was, why change?

[mversic]

likewise for other files in CI

[aoyako]

1. --target=libs is easier to validate since only named arguments are used in build_wasm.sh
2. --profile=${{ env.IROHA2_PROFILE }} works for deploy, but for PROFILE=profiling, it will require changes in memory, fuel, and timeouts. I think deploy should be used everywhere by default.

[mversic]

2. ok, but how is someone to build a custom image with profile profiling now?

[mversic]

why change to named argument instead of position based

[aoyako]

It was easier to validate when all arguments were named. I can revert if these must be position-based.

[mversic]

revert

[mversic]

why is this not dev or test?

[mversic]

also, it seems unused. you should use it to install iroha

[aoyako]

Will remove.

[mversic]

IMO you should use it for cargo install iroha. And you should set it to PROFILE: test

[mversic]

but others may disagree on what profile to use. @s8sato @0x009922 ?

[mversic]

you will discover then that you need to increase limits because tests will get flaky

[s8sato]

I have no strong opinions on this

[mversic]

I'm of the opinion that whenever we're running tests we should run the test build

[mversic]

but on the other hand tests will run slower. We should take that into consideration

[0x009922]

I don't have a very strong opinion on this too.

Speaking of the profile of irohad used by iroha_test_network, since the goal was to have a black-boxed environment close to what final users will have, it could be a point towards using release profile.