From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#68006: 30.0.50; Image-mode speed Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2024 16:19:31 -0800 Message-ID: References: <87le9jlfd6.fsf@ledu-giraud.fr> <83wmt3bkla.fsf@gnu.org> <87h6k6lgdy.fsf@ledu-giraud.fr> <83wmt29zfy.fsf@gnu.org> <87il4m6rcx.fsf@ledu-giraud.fr> <83bkae9j11.fsf@gnu.org> <87bkadyqdk.fsf@ledu-giraud.fr> <8334voanr1.fsf@gnu.org> <877cl0zvln.fsf@ledu-giraud.fr> <83y1dg954u.fsf@gnu.org> <87zfxvalnq.fsf@ledu-giraud.fr> <83o7eb938y.fsf@gnu.org> <87wmsxmff3.fsf@ledu-giraud.fr> <83mstt5hrk.fsf@gnu.org> <87frzjvpb5.fsf@ledu-giraud.fr> <83le9a3kqs.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="12405"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: manuel@ledu-giraud.fr, 68006@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 02 01:20:23 2024 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 1rKSW7-00032Q-P4 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 02 Jan 2024 01:20:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rKSVo-0004Xe-Ln; Mon, 01 Jan 2024 19:20:04 -0500 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 1rKSVl-0004X1-Dh for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jan 2024 19:20:03 -0500 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 1rKSVk-0002me-Hb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jan 2024 19:20:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rKSVm-0006sE-J4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jan 2024 19:20:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Kangas Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2024 00:20:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 68006 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 68006-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B68006.170415478226380 (code B ref 68006); Tue, 02 Jan 2024 00:20:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 68006) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Jan 2024 00:19:42 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48972 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rKSVR-0006rQ-Ge for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jan 2024 19:19:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ed1-x535.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::535]:58684) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rKSVP-0006r9-Fe for 68006@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 01 Jan 2024 19:19:40 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ed1-x535.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-553ba2f0c8fso9976474a12.1 for <68006@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 01 Jan 2024 16:19:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1704154771; x=1704759571; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+imye1P6v/le7MbZ2XtWS+R9TGZfOryjH9/K84RKFNE=; b=aBsHWVOK5lAbhe8c+aL3IzleTTX3bdG7QzYxi0Y4tx8oBlBmZb3Q9EDJzdfllTYEwY geSzm1qlbZEbuxch4zoV3G36HvKZRV/BsB1PKE2y8uLybc0hysyPDpn6pqiHPiRc3+pJ OXMfDMiLCPInQM2AQ6BaUK3CCkDF7qIs4DNbiHJtjX38sNQRo4UmThX8Ub5pPedCB9Z2 Q7GYR3uXsDPwHeZr6AmqqupwX+P1zyQLNvqtlFZxJXPE/73PMzRD4MH3TZ+IuwrtPlFo RMpJt2vy2V4aBZk03/L43DctSXAk9O/osqhmUQvjMTKxPzCKEwJChMgkXb8F5+nG7Cdc 8myg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704154771; x=1704759571; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+imye1P6v/le7MbZ2XtWS+R9TGZfOryjH9/K84RKFNE=; b=WN3CV4PYnMA7A5sK9uOYQ4lRjj8FAn6DjLvmDPYej76EjyeLa3jyMUxa1T7ANPhGvT l2XjlnRRdmD+qCjbrP9Yry1cMiuEhSXU5obuJtsf6gD31SCARtIlLewB0bIHMkz6tjtP JfL+GiU/P1Q8dxFrDV81aV3U37e2qPUzRzH4yxla6kY7lp3Zs27fGFVw5WiU7ibGxi+2 7E77kpunpLqq1rbyLGC4ylxjU9WwfxvYv65nwq/tYXV1mg0wIkXpKnoU9qn+OBGfhizo uGT68MlYkn8zk2e1Rk73rDpsOOAVMhensYZHqfgSzKBozpvviIJdKENWXKcXcskBq5lN dIBg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzaYAebCjXHNr3A/ou104xo6resN+Gp1vr4EFVBOzGBId61QDb8 BPl8hgUtAD7VeUZyzWVhvX8CgoKYTXZ4kUxxd5k= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGxIbKYqf1WT4v0bfQzEFwBrGS63x6wCTqIKhX4/sHDq3ndvjut/YbmwyOiCORx3LekzPOIQJJSFTtsnG6g/GM= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d495:0:b0:555:3252:9770 with SMTP id b21-20020aa7d495000000b0055532529770mr2947215edr.33.1704154771586; Mon, 01 Jan 2024 16:19:31 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Mon, 1 Jan 2024 16:19:31 -0800 In-Reply-To: <83le9a3kqs.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:277201 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Stefan Kangas >> Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2023 15:57:28 -0800 >> Cc: 68006@debbugs.gnu.org >> >> Taking a step back, why are images treated differently from other >> buffers? If the risk is that the image changes on disk without us >> noticing, then users should need to either run `revert-buffer' or enable >> `auto-revert-mode'. If we are talking about images that are inline in a >> buffer, the cache should be flushed only when the buffer itself is >> reverted. What am I missing? > > See my explanation of the purpose of this particular cache here: > > https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=68006#14 I read that, yes. Quoting what you wrote there, and I hope I'm quoting the most relevant part: > The real purpose of the image cache is not to hold the image in > memory for displaying it again and again, the purpose is to allow > the display engine to generate the pixels once, then reuse those > pixels during the current redisplay cycle or a few following > redisplay cycles. Basically, I don't see how this difference relates to manually evicting the cache or not. > In a nutshell, this cache is ephemeral anyway, and will be flushed at > some arbitrary time whether we want it or not, because its purpose is > not what you think it is. If it is flushed anyways, then that is exactly what we want here, I think. The idea is to flush it less often, AFAIU. > In any case, if you intend to not flush the cache at all, then what > does that mean for Emacs sessions running for days and weeks, let > alone months, on end? will they keep these images in memory forever? > Or should GC sometimes evict those images from the cache, and if so, > under what conditions? Are you saying that, if this particular call is removed, we will never flush the cache (i.e. we will have memory leaks)?