From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
To: Yuan Fu <casouri@gmail.com>
Cc: 60691@debbugs.gnu.org, juri@linkov.net
Subject: bug#60691: 29.0.60; Slow tree-sitter font-lock in ruby-ts-mode
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 01:40:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ba1ca9c-78e3-f961-787e-4758beaa3c5b@yandex.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6F1CC7E3-E5B2-4E51-93F6-455A2D0C771E@gmail.com>
On 12/01/2023 23:58, Yuan Fu wrote:
>
> Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> writes:
>
>> Yuan? Just making sure you got this message.
>
> Sorry for the delay :-)
>
>> On 10/01/2023 16:10, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
>>> Perhaps Yuan has some further ideas. There are some strong oddities here:
>>> - Some time into debugging and repeating the benchmark again and
>>> again, I get the "Pure Lisp storage overflowed" message. Just once
>>> per Emacs session. It doesn't seem to change much, so it might be
>>> unimportant.
>
> That sounds like 60653. The next time you encounter it, could you record
> the output of M-x memory-usage and M-x memory-report?
Managed to reproduce this after running the test in a couple of
different files.
But 'M-x memory-usage' says no such command, and 'M-x memory-report'
ends up with this error:
Debugger entered--Lisp error: (wrong-type-argument number-or-marker-p nil)
memory-report--gc-elem(nil strings)
memory-report--garbage-collect()
memory-report()
funcall-interactively(memory-report)
#<subr call-interactively>(memory-report record nil)
apply(#<subr call-interactively> memory-report (record nil))
call-interactively@ido-cr+-record-current-command(#<subr
call-interactively> memory-report record nil)
apply(call-interactively@ido-cr+-record-current-command #<subr
call-interactively> (memory-report record nil))
call-interactively(memory-report record nil)
command-execute(memory-report record)
execute-extended-command(nil "memory-report" nil)
funcall-interactively(execute-extended-command nil "memory-report" nil)
#<subr call-interactively>(execute-extended-command nil nil)
apply(#<subr call-interactively> execute-extended-command (nil nil))
call-interactively@ido-cr+-record-current-command(#<subr
call-interactively> execute-extended-command nil nil)
apply(call-interactively@ido-cr+-record-current-command #<subr
call-interactively> (execute-extended-command nil nil))
call-interactively(execute-extended-command nil nil)
command-execute(execute-extended-command)
garbage-collect's docstring says:
However, if there was overflow in pure space, and Emacs was dumped
using the "unexec" method, ‘garbage-collect’ returns nil, because
real GC can’t be done.
I don't know if my Emacs was dumped using "unexec", though. ./configure
says I'm using pdumper.
In case that matters, I'm testing the emacs-29 branch.
>>> - The profiler output looks like this:
>>> 18050 75% -
>>> font-lock-fontify-syntactically-region
>>> 15686 65% - treesit-font-lock-fontify-region
>>> 3738 15% treesit--children-covering-range-recurse
>>> 188 0% treesit-fontify-with-override
>>> - When running the benchmark for the first time in a buffer (such as
>>> ruby.rb), the variable treesit--font-lock-fast-mode is usually
>>> changed to t. In one Emacs session, after I changed it to nil and
>>> re-ran the benchmark, the variable stayed nil, and the benchmark ran
>>> much faster (like 10s vs 36s).
>>> In the next session, after I restarted Emacs, that didn't happen: it
>>> always stayed at t, even if I reset it to nil between runs. But if I
>>> comment out the block in treesit-font-lock-fontify-region that uses
>>> it
>>> ;; (when treesit--font-lock-fast-mode
>>> ;; (setq nodes (treesit--children-covering-range-recurse
>>> ;; (car nodes) start end (* 4 jit-lock-chunk-size))))
>>> and evaluate the defun, the benchmark runs much faster again: 11s.
>>> (But then I brought it all back, and re-ran the tests, and the
>>> variable stayed nil that time around; to sum up: the way it's turned
>>> on is unstable.)
>>> Should treesit--font-lock-fast-mode be locally bound inside that
>>> function, so that it's reset between chunks? Or maybe the condition
>>> for its enabling should be tweaked? E.g. I don't think there are any
>>> particularly large or deep nodes in ruby.rb's parse tree. It's a
>>> very shallow file.
>
> Yeah that is a not-very-clever hack. I’ve got an idea: I can add a C
> function that checks the maximum depth of a parse tree and the maximum
> node span, and turn on the fast-mode if the depth is too large or a node
> is too wide. And we do that check once before doing any fontification.
>
> I’ll report back once I add it.
Thanks!
And if the check can be fast enough, we could probably do it in the
beginning of fontifying every chunk.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-12 23:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-09 17:16 bug#60691: 29.0.60; Slow tree-sitter font-lock in ruby-ts-mode Juri Linkov
2023-01-09 22:33 ` Dmitry Gutov
2023-01-10 8:10 ` Juri Linkov
2023-01-10 14:10 ` Dmitry Gutov
2023-01-10 17:50 ` Juri Linkov
2023-01-11 12:12 ` Dmitry Gutov
2023-01-11 12:12 ` Dmitry Gutov
2023-01-12 21:58 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-12 23:40 ` Dmitry Gutov [this message]
2023-01-13 7:57 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-13 9:15 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-13 11:51 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-14 3:48 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-14 7:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-14 7:51 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-14 8:01 ` Eli Zaretskii
2023-01-14 8:46 ` Andreas Schwab
2023-01-14 23:03 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-18 6:50 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-19 18:28 ` Dmitry Gutov
2023-01-20 22:24 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-22 2:01 ` Dmitry Gutov
2023-01-29 8:25 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-29 23:07 ` Dmitry Gutov
2023-01-29 23:23 ` Yuan Fu
2023-01-30 0:15 ` Dmitry Gutov
2023-02-01 5:26 ` Yuan Fu
2023-02-01 15:11 ` Dmitry Gutov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0ba1ca9c-78e3-f961-787e-4758beaa3c5b@yandex.ru \
--to=dgutov@yandex.ru \
--cc=60691@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=casouri@gmail.com \
--cc=juri@linkov.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).