From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#66117: 30.0.50; `find-buffer-visiting' is slow when opening large number of buffers Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2023 10:54:34 +0000 Message-ID: <87bkdr2651.fsf@localhost> References: <878r919qfh.fsf@localhost> <72c93fb0-bf3e-3dad-69c0-2147cfa40f57@gutov.dev> <875y42xyex.fsf@localhost> <87zg1ewfc2.fsf@localhost> <834jjm749q.fsf@gnu.org> <87cyyawd1a.fsf@localhost> <83pm2a5k85.fsf@gnu.org> <87wmwh2tae.fsf@localhost> <83zg1d468w.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10005"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: dmitry@gutov.dev, 66117@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 24 12:54:17 2023 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 1qkMkh-0002Ka-1U for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 12:54:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qkMkK-0003ZN-MO; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 06:53:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qkMkI-0003Z3-Ni for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 06:53:50 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qkMkI-0004D2-8s for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 06:53:50 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkMkT-0003B9-V2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 06:54:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Ihor Radchenko Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2023 10:54:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 66117 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 66117-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B66117.169555281712182 (code B ref 66117); Sun, 24 Sep 2023 10:54:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 66117) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Sep 2023 10:53:37 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41149 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkMk5-0003AQ-1A for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 06:53:37 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]:52133) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1qkMk1-0003AA-Og for 66117@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 06:53:34 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C389240028 for <66117@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 12:53:16 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4RtjXW0J1Kz9s09; Sun, 24 Sep 2023 12:53:14 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <83zg1d468w.fsf@gnu.org> 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:271229 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Also, even `find-file-noselect' does not use >> `set-visited-file-name'. > > Why does it matter? We need to catch this in find-file-noselect and > in set-visited-file-name anyway. Mostly because I feel that I misunderstand where `buffer-file-name' is set. `find-file-noselect-1' only sets `buffer-file-name' when (if find-file-visit-truename ;; defcustom, nil by default (setq buffer-file-name (expand-file-name buffer-file-truename))) >> - ~find-alternate-file~ >> - ~find-file-noselect-1~ (but not by default?) >> - ~set-visited-file-name~ >> - ~file-name-non-special~ > > These _must_ update the cache. I feel that I am still missing where `buffer-file-name' is set when opening file via C-x C-f. Debugger showed something weird in my testing. >> - Functions setting ~buffer-file-truename~ manually (except those setting it to nil): > > Are the cases where we find the buffer via file's truename significant > in the profiles you've seen? Not significant for the profiles I got, but I did not want to break the existing code. > ... if not, these functions are not relevant > to the issue at hand. If the search by truename _is_ significant, we > could cache that as well. Just to make sure that we are on the same page: the cache I am proposing should be complete - if a buffer is missing from the cache, we should be sure that there is no matching buffer. `find-buffer-visiting' explicitly checks for `buffer-file-truename'. So, if the cache does not account for `buffer-file-truename', there will be divergence between the existing code and when using the cache. Same argument for `buffer-file-number' >> > Programs that make these changes are asking for trouble, IMO. AFAICT, >> > find-buffer-visiting will never find such buffers anyway. >> >> It would, in its current form. Because it calls `get-file-buffer' that >> loops over all the buffers and checks their buffer-local >> `buffer-file-name' value, including values set via `setq' in Elisp. > > Again, which of the loops took the significant time in the profiles > you have? the one in get-file-buffer or the ones in > find-buffer-visiting? Most of the time was taken by `find-buffer-visiting'. Replacing `find-buffer-visiting' with `get-file-buffer' in certain (not all) places reduced the total runtime by 30%. I do not have more granular data because the profiler did not give very granular data for the internals of `find-buffer-visiting'. I will try to setup a test on my machine for more detailed data. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at