From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16923: 24.3.50; reression: `set-frame-size' loses mode line Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 19:59:01 +0100 Message-ID: <531B6875.6030406@gmx.at> References: <29b76228-778a-4aea-8fe4-5abedb5b6795@default> <531589F3.1050300@gmx.at> <70615a8e-3923-40c3-bfbc-af0a305cd6df@default> <5316D1B5.8040801@gmx.at> <53176AF2.9010800@gmx.at> <53177AEF.9050106@gmx.at> <3f31643f-2638-4ada-8dc4-b3069f3a82fc@default> <531780D7.6070109@gmx.at> <291bd9d5-923f-440a-821a-06f585557e67@default> <5318AFD9.4000208@gmx.at> <8be91728-fcea-4e74-afff-db6a55b52985@default> <5318C478.1090007@gmx.at> <0f1c6cae-f9cd-4a2b-a662-bcc4116daafc@default> <5318E810.7000705@gmx.at> <531977B2.8030109@gmx.at> <531A0655.5040400@gmx.at> <5e0232ee-58e3-42a3-8102-e12e8e605b2b@default> <531A11BE.5070300@gmx.at> <738285f8-0119-49cd-b5b5-7e9607fadff3@default> <531ADEBC.9030200@gmx.at> <1cb471a0-5db3-4c77-90ff-ed8aa2c9bd0b@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1394305216 29510 80.91.229.3 (8 Mar 2014 19:00:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 19:00:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 16923@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 08 20:00:24 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WMMTv-0006q0-Lw for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 20:00:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41546 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WMMTv-0000Z3-9k for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:00:23 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56992) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WMMTl-0000JW-1u for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:00:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WMMTd-0004yh-Na for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:00:12 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:55745) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WMMTd-0004yC-KW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:00:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WMMTc-0006wS-EN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 14:00:04 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 19:00:04 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 16923 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 16923-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B16923.139430514726539 (code B ref 16923); Sat, 08 Mar 2014 19:00:04 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16923) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Mar 2014 18:59:07 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56921 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WMMSh-0006ty-1G for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 13:59:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]:64548) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WMMSe-0006tp-Ki for 16923@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 13:59:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [188.22.42.18] ([188.22.42.18]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LxxKu-1XIiIN0msW-015Lod; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 19:59:03 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1cb471a0-5db3-4c77-90ff-ed8aa2c9bd0b@default> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:4fK2GZQDfrQFvGhnJSgHTlEmME6H8Wxiakjp/3C/YAhb8e6ehW/ iv/Ilt/TJwH+Wbr1UJbaCZmv19muyLXynPUW34LHmogMUC7ODQLMexxpaTU6RtXXR+2PMXO EaREmUTTzn97k8bflUDppV47mD+ePLCMomhtFYxYj+By5Lb/Qb7zXVxDyFjD1VgY8e4LnMO Z1+/45UkhCwC+2tzCpOIQ== X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:86667 Archived-At: > In the debug output I sent, file throw-emacs-bug-16923.txt, you see, > as I mentioned, seven calls to `fit-frame' (each "------------" in the > file). I was doing `s RET' in Info, non-incrementally searching for > the next occurrence of a string ("terminals"). Each press of `s' > entailed a single call to `fit-frame'. In some cases a second > occurrence was found in the same node, so any `s' and its `fit-frame' > other than the first in such a node is essentially a no-op (except for > the bug side effect of removing the mode line). > > Does that respond to your question about how often frame resizing is > requested per "redisplay cycle"? I do not know the period, whether > in terms of a number of input events or elapsed time, of a "redisplay > cycle", but I can say that my pressing of `s' determined the calls > to `fit-frame': one per press. > > And in the other test I did earlier, just using `M-: (fit-frame)' > twice in the same frame, the number of calls to `fit-frame' was two. I see 42 calls of `window--dump-frame' which from what you say above means that for every `fit-frame' there are 6 calls of `window--dump-frame'. Does that mean there are 6 `set-frame-size' requests per each `fit-frame' call? Note: I'm not interested in `fit-frame' or how you calculate frame sizes. I'm only interested in your calls of `set-frame-size' or whatever you use to resize your frame. How many such calls are there in throw-emacs-bug-16923? And how can I attribute any of these calls to a frame without a mode line? > You say that you "assume that Emacs sent so many resize requests in > a row that it was able to confuse Windows". What do you mean to draw > attention to here: the number of requests in a row The number. > or the rapidity or > frequency of resize requests? What constitutes a "row", i.e., until > interrupted by what? By redisplay. > Based on what I say above, I do not see how it could be that either > a high cadence or a high number of successive `fit-frame' calls could > be overwhelming redisplay. But I am entirely ignorant about redisplay, > and I am not very clear about what you are asking here. The problem is not in redisplay. The problem is the number of resize requests sent in succession to the window manager before redisplay occurs. On Windows this is the number of calls of AdjustWindowRect which corresponds to the number of calls of `set-frame-size'. Redisplay should occur only after Emacs has negotiated with Windows for each of these calls. Anyway. Beginning with the fourth "------------" on line 271 of throw-emacs-bug-16923 the height difference of window and client rectangle is 56 and not 80 as before. Unless we can resolve that mystery it hardly make sense to experiment any further. martin