From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#16923: 24.3.50; reression: `set-frame-size' loses mode line Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 17:48:08 +0200 Message-ID: <83lhwkpu87.fsf@gnu.org> References: <04dda5ae-8b70-42f5-ae09-c1d05ebc9297@default> <5314DB5D.50709@gmx.at> <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> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1394293766 7352 80.91.229.3 (8 Mar 2014 15:49:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:49:26 +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 16:49:31 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 1WMJVD-0001FH-Ej for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 16:49:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41006 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WMJVD-0000fG-45 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 10:49:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59408) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WMJUq-0000Ip-GF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 10:49:13 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WMJUl-0005zd-GN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 10:49:08 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:55524) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WMJUl-0005zN-Ay for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 10:49:03 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WMJUk-0006Nj-Ms for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 10:49:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 15:49:02 +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=B16923.139429370224462 (code B ref 16923); Sat, 08 Mar 2014 15:49:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 16923) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Mar 2014 15:48:22 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56706 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WMJU4-0006MQ-Ic for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 10:48:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout25.012.net.il ([80.179.55.181]:55202) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WMJTx-0006M9-Hh for 16923@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 10:48:15 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout25.012.net.il by mtaout25.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N2400A00JL70000@mtaout25.012.net.il> for 16923@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 17:46:18 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout25.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N24004RTJT6GB50@mtaout25.012.net.il>; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 17:46:18 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <1cb471a0-5db3-4c77-90ff-ed8aa2c9bd0b@default> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il 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:86657 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 07:34:54 -0800 (PST) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: 16923@debbugs.gnu.org > > > From the backtrace you attached earlier it's clearly visible that in 21 > > calls the value is 56. And as I remarked earlier, this value is Windows > > internal. So unless we have some proof that Emacs is asking Windows to > > do something like enlarging the title bar or wrapping the menu bar, we > > must assume that Emacs sent so many resize requests in a row that it was > > able to confuse Windows. > > > > I have no idea how often you ask for changing the frame size in one and > > the same redisplay cycle. On Windows, without ConfigureNotify events, I > > wouldn't issue more than one request per frame in one redisplay cycle. > > Everything else means asking for trouble. > > 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. Every time Emacs waits for input, it automatically enters redisplay. So, unless you typed a series of 's' keys faster than Emacs could process them (which I doubt, since you probably looked at the search results before pressing the next 's'), each 's' keystroke would account for one redisplay cycle. If you took your time reading before you pressed another key, there could be more than one redisplay cycle between every two 's' keystrokes. > 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. Perhaps Martin meant something other than the redisplay cycle I described above.