From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#43389: 28.0.50; Emacs memory leaks using hard disk all time Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 10:20:46 +0200 Message-ID: <83h7pbp5wh.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83y2j0qb2v.fsf@gnu.org> <831rgppg3w.fsf@gnu.org> <83zh3czbvz.fsf@gnu.org> <83blfovzxz.fsf@gnu.org> <87o8jnu5f2.fsf@mail.trevorbentley.com> <83o8jmu49z.fsf@gnu.org> <522e3cc0-c563-3308-7264-1b09cd5e264b@redhat.com> <87o8jltglg.fsf@mail.trevorbentley.com> <43b8f55b-d201-76e0-2d19-d97dec8798aa@redhat.com> <87im9ttfeg.fsf@mail.trevorbentley.com> <399d4681-940a-c782-b91e-750e62840cb6@redhat.com> <83pn40qkyb.fsf@gnu.org> <418751f6-41be-a5e2-908a-ea4196d5fb9b@redhat.com> <83y2inq2sp.fsf@gnu.org> <60253612-49f0-a1aa-b9e6-39cfef8d62b5@redhat.com> <83mtz3p7qy.fsf@gnu.org> <83lfenp78f.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30237"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: fweimer@redhat.com, 43389@debbugs.gnu.org, bugs@gnu.support, dj@redhat.com, michael_heerdegen@web.de, trevor@trevorbentley.com To: carlos@redhat.com Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 27 09:22:27 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ1P-0007lW-E7 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:22:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39038 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ1O-0000NH-Et for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:22:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46450) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ10-0000MK-SO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:22:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:60525) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ10-0005yj-Kj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:22:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ10-0001wZ-Ew for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:22:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:22:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 43389 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 43389-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B43389.16064652727394 (code B ref 43389); Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:22:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 43389) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Nov 2020 08:21:12 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43835 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ0C-0001vC-5A for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:21:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56140) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ0A-0001ux-BZ for 43389@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:21:11 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:33100) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ04-0005bj-O7; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:21:04 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2550 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kiZ03-0002lQ-UH; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 03:21:04 -0500 In-Reply-To: <83lfenp78f.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:52:00 +0200) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:194412 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:52:00 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > Cc: fweimer@redhat.com, 43389@debbugs.gnu.org, bugs@gnu.support, dj@redhat.com, > carlos@redhat.com, michael_heerdegen@web.de > > > Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:40:53 +0200 > > From: Eli Zaretskii > > Cc: fweimer@redhat.com, 43389@debbugs.gnu.org, bugs@gnu.support, dj@redhat.com, > > michael_heerdegen@web.de, trevor@trevorbentley.com > > > > > lisp_align_malloc (alloc.c:1195) > > > Fcons (alloc.c:2694) > > > concat (fns.c:730) > > > Fcopy_sequence (fns.c:598) > > > timer_check (keyboard.c:4395) > > > wait_reading_process_output (process.c:5334) > > > sit_for (dispnew.c:6056) > > > read_char (keyboard.c:2742) > > > read_key_sequence (keyboard.c:9551) > > > command_loop_1 (keyboard.c:1354) > > > internal_condition_case (eval.c:1365) > > > command_loop_2 (keyboard.c:1095) > > > internal_catch (eval.c:1126) > > > command_loop (keyboard.c:1074) > > > recursive_edit_1 (keyboard.c:718) > > > Frecursive_edit (keyboard.c:790) > > > main (emacs.c:2080) > > > > > > There is a 171MiB's worth of allocations in that path. > > > > > > There are a lot of traces ending in wait_reading_process_output that > > > are consuming 50MiB. > > > > Thanks. If they are like the one above, the allocations are due to > > some timer. Could be jabber, I'll take a look at it. Or maybe > > helm-ff--cache-mode-refresh, whatever that is; need to look at Helm as > > well. > > Oops, I got this mixed up: the timer list is from Jean, but the massif > files are from Trevor. Double oops: the above just shows that each time we process timers, we copy the list of the timers first. Not sure what to do about that. Hmm... Maybe we should try GC at the end of each timer_check call? Is it possible to tell how much time did it take to allocate those 171MB via the above chain of calls? I'm trying to assess the rate of allocations we request this way. Each call to lisp_align_malloc above requests a 1008-byte chunk of memory for a new block of Lisp conses. Would it benefit us to tune this value to a larger or smaller size, as far as glibc's malloc is concerned?