From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How to measure frame rate in fps? Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2021 19:48:17 +0300 Message-ID: <1fe36d16-202a-9c00-7a17-946226ad8e0f@yandex.ru> References: <83h7ih24kc.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2btzlui.fsf@gnu.org> <4fe7f7a7-7c23-25fc-2d59-f1290436f487@yandex.ru> <83sg21zjg0.fsf@gnu.org> <472fab69-c072-74d4-e8d2-0dcefab7f726@yandex.ru> <834kehyp6s.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8cjikuj.fsf@gnu.org> <838s3ni2z9.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10490"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 Cc: wyuenho@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jun 06 18:49:49 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1lpvy8-0002Ro-AG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 18:49:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50542 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lpvy7-0003ZR-C6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 12:49:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34648) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lpvwl-0002lz-RM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 12:48:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-x332.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::332]:33312) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lpvwj-0001RV-Qo; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 12:48:23 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-x332.google.com with SMTP id s70-20020a1ca9490000b02901a589651424so2925268wme.0; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 09:48:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=E/mWMfM5N99qFvIlHDNqjiEd8U3uOYwaUe/Zdh/LG7I=; b=ToQm4W+Yji0YknU3w6YDJ7/466yN+Mat3c8g8PHLir+9g7fJMSVJl1cXZB5IYlQX8P Or8Ak8yWa1tNDgLE7IuWCl9Y949tWUirWYENvDsjRbMjjql6pDCM1Ko3qxaPx5V5zNYU IzB/ZjlWkRiWeUgktgNtsuDHcodTaPZd1K6mTQgUZVoLW+ukkn9+8la8pe+aGQpl1DGv f+p6x+Yk6AcSYVRoNY5137AuGDWvUDEhbsHEWJjcMoH/JfzAYWHoT7SbqsqRWiFlQ2Ti 934DanolxQU0cgp3txAC9jiQIJ9LccALrnYP1hhH8YymnHJF5DM84VFw770Tb9Rft0OI d8OQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=E/mWMfM5N99qFvIlHDNqjiEd8U3uOYwaUe/Zdh/LG7I=; b=ogPdzn/99Df+0TxTmtLo26ZugYD0yA5HpVbhhSdS/qbGxvFz7plkY60inkM1asG/6+ bNRpn99Zoh44sTWsl6siOf6+JcqQ3zlUKCu/5aey4s49wBqYb51FZ0hd4xDbFJr4WCqt bzfO+DYjao+TH3Px8lwYVuzIdnWNVabmuW/WHsg43z2B97j4C1JJuv7gU7Eufiqt4OPk TJ6CMXPt3m5/6v+O9ruIAV5/5R4LuS3tIZ93PDoKThvslUJv63gAbMPdNI/7ZqWADG7z UvhinoCMa/RakM26RLg6G4nmfhtdedLa5RISdXoV4ld2NT7tcmh2WpT6roaU++vOcPm4 9u+w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530PBJ4mjJ7RJh4KeGfgPtNl0LSM1puowkSG8TGXLFj2H2HIGBVB uGdx1NAiKkGzR9QwoZVY4dxAS3Yjnng= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwPwKm1FfXYpdw8UcttakmB+sDwfk8XC8PvmyLYdQK2SQ3yVxVKj7wRQNTWOju6OQYTXVnQNQ== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c394:: with SMTP id s20mr8635217wmj.33.1622998099274; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 09:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.6] ([46.251.119.176]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id v132sm14953748wmb.14.2021.06.06.09.48.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 06 Jun 2021 09:48:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <838s3ni2z9.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Language: en-US Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::332; envelope-from=raaahh@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm1-x332.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.248, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:270483 Archived-At: On 06.06.2021 15:36, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Then I don't see how this is relevant to the issue with the GTK tool > bar making "do-nothing" redisplays more expensive. The above is a > completely different scenario; depending on what exactly was Emacs > doing in this scenario, redrawing of the GTK tool bar could indeed > account for an insignificant percentage of the CPU time. In my scenario the observable window configuration doesn't change between redisplays (though, of course, "current buffer" is switched multiple times under the covers, to send request and parse/receive response), and the values of point (again, during redisplay), are only 1 character position apart. So if there is some caching of the toolbar contents, I don't see why it wouldn't work. I'm also not sure how rendering it can take 10-15 extra milliseconds, but for all I know this could be normal. >> Since the code path that calls (redisplay) in Company is only triggered >> when talking to an external process (or, more generally, when the >> backend does something that allows a timer to run), to test this I >> repeatedly exercise completion using an external service, talking to it >> via HTTP/JSON. > > And what are you trying to investigate or establish with profiling > this scenario? Maybe I simply don't understand what you wanted to > demonstrate. That toolbar being enabled has a somewhat unexpected effect on redisplay performance.