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: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 00:31:37 +0300 Message-ID: <472fab69-c072-74d4-e8d2-0dcefab7f726@yandex.ru> References: <83h7ih24kc.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2btzlui.fsf@gnu.org> <4fe7f7a7-7c23-25fc-2d59-f1290436f487@yandex.ru> <83sg21zjg0.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="28968"; 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 Tue Jun 01 23:33:05 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 1loC0V-0007Ns-GU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 23:33:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60474 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loC0U-00021L-Gu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 17:33:02 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58832) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loBzG-0000Yg-GY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 17:31:47 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-x329.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::329]:37688) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1loBzD-0002Ew-NL; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 17:31:46 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-x329.google.com with SMTP id f20-20020a05600c4e94b0290181f6edda88so2453660wmq.2; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 14:31:41 -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=UMP8+N3/2ggWsYjtxBCGMU2dk2nfr5r50/8XLcKSyXw=; b=lBAjA/qm1vm2eYXc89xla2KcQ0TVJ2n9a9g2/Ozv2wCnFFvq4SHEeig8L1YQ3DHMcb fl81Av15fnG28bivjqL5m8YUFIuqVlyl/exWbSObsUI+gmnr+DOyGJv0TLEnHnDvwIZ9 w3oF4E6hvhaG+4ednA20nM9OtIQH7aEP7xYnKUuAZD6LTXDFSogdnH0ssm8hLqritHhQ Ns78hyUIPCRlT0H928kA23wQWssY1jkBpqB+ZpgGt6RBaXoAjCTid8joEjTnLydTGqdq AxB6I4UL4fV7rnWqJX6zk/XkgkrFLIvwLGdBLayMQC8bWfxl2bfy0VlrWR0NtUQH1F39 8ZJg== 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=UMP8+N3/2ggWsYjtxBCGMU2dk2nfr5r50/8XLcKSyXw=; b=s5ZchVqUSLb85j95rWBiDI4CthNxwEp1yOo2mZvpRRmKrqe61gvxhLsfTbbBFeuw9j TkN6resBIleJ2RnERLSs8Ez6SLUW816ugqNsGAO8bj+7oi8l32Dbkgzjmyh4QSlWijJM ujT9nElooJvdRtYPCvCJHjXM556zs1lME86a1FY0XeYn5Pwaam+QTjVMSyIzfSwPLID1 CXW91gvxI75PdtKb8ZJmvYK5J37coM9EsceoGIfdkP2476oYeYqB322etZfUpiVhuuWg qadOSs/BHU7u2ONoMd3Y4mhflA/MdArM628w/3oUxKakHF5cby2kZD1e/gE1dkPXWWnE 9i2A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533DsOBn5+IG2oK7/bEAya0nE6/5fEY5jbu64/WVx2V9KvoXy71L yDZkvIEZLZgTWicqk+f9ov8gMv20m3E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzlxfF4WWLSsvMVjjBWPsN/32iKRUAWeZDxQW6u7epV9aVj/aRu7OrCDuGzkkQn5+oyrPcU4g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:198c:: with SMTP id t12mr27945905wmq.145.1622583100237; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 14:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.6] ([46.251.119.176]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id u17sm4402167wrt.61.2021.06.01.14.31.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 01 Jun 2021 14:31:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83sg21zjg0.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Language: en-US Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::329; envelope-from=raaahh@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm1-x329.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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=0.249, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.613, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham 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:270253 Archived-At: On 01.06.2021 18:35, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Yes, that figures: entering the minibuffer triggers a more thorough > redisplay than usual: we redisplay the menu bar, the tool bar, and > several other things as result, for reasons that should be obvious. > > Try C-x C-e instead after typing the sexp in *scratch. In that > scenario, I don't expect the tool bar to be redrawn. Thanks, that's a better methodology. I still see long-ish redisplays in my "real world" scenario, with timings like Elapsed time: 0.003500s Elapsed time: 0.026936s Elapsed time: 0.024454s Elapsed time: 0.024453s on redisplay with tool-bar-mode on and Elapsed time: 0.005239s Elapsed time: 0.005562s Elapsed time: 0.014864s Elapsed time: 0.014525s Elapsed time: 0.005216s Elapsed time: 0.014419s Elapsed time: 0.015004s Elapsed time: 0.010501s Elapsed time: 0.013163s with it off (both measured with 'benchmark-progn' injected in some working code), but none of that with 'emacs -Q'. Perhaps those are to be expected (even though the Emacs frame doesn't change much, the scenario involves 1 or 2 network calls). >>> How do you deduce that posn-at-point triggers redisplay of the GTK >>> tool bar? It shouldn't, AFAIR. posn-at-point and its ilk only >>> simulate display of text, they don't care about window's and frame's >>> decorations. >> >> You're right, posn-at-point shows me different timings. Often enough as >> high as 12-15ms, which is not great for a low latency display, but the >> numbers don't seem to be tied to tool-bar-mode being on. > > If you want me to take a look at those 15ms cases, I suggest to file a > bug report with the details and a recipe. With updated testing approach, I don't see those timings with posn-at-point anymore, thanks. The only repro I still see is the one described above, in the "complex" scenario. Not sure if it's worth reporting, or if the numbers simply look correct.