From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dynamic loading progress Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:19:09 -0700 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <55DB7C3D.4090106@cs.ucla.edu> References: <54E2355A.90@87.69.4.28> <83vbj1u020.fsf@gnu.org> <54E24CA4.9020601@dancol.org> <83h9uk7ddb.fsf@gnu.org> <54E382A5.5030408@dancol.org> <54F789B2.6030105@dancol.org> <87egnel6ac.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87vbgpk1po.fsf@lifelogs.com> <85mw20gmeo.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <878u97nyjn.fsf@lifelogs.com> <86d1yirnqw.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <87si7977rs.fsf@tromey.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1440447580 28789 80.91.229.3 (24 Aug 2015 20:19:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 20:19:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Aur=c3=a9lien_Aptel?= , Daniel Colascione , Stephen Leake , Emacs development discussions To: Stefan Monnier , Tom Tromey Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 24 22:19:31 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1ZTyDK-0003Zy-Pb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:19:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56571 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZTyDK-0007QN-42 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:19:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32827) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZTyD6-0007QF-6c for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:19:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZTyD2-0008VF-SB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:19:16 -0400 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:49717) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZTyD2-0008Uc-Ms for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 16:19:12 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57B82160F1C; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:19:11 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id BnCaK02exy6b; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:19:10 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A61C0160F17; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:19:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id ixUqAzE92fyc; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:19:10 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU (Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU [131.179.64.200]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 89359160EFB; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:19:09 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:189128 Archived-At: On 08/24/2015 12:13 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: > IIUC there are still some situations where we build without conservative > stack scanning. > > We should probably go and enable it everywhere. We did that last year, before 24.4 came out. GC_MARK_STACK is defined to be GC_MAKE_GCPROS_NOOPS unless the builder compiles with -DGC_MARK_STACK=somethingelse. I think nobody does that except perhaps when testing. > If noone complains that > should indicate that indeed conservative stack scanning is used (or ca > be used) everywhere, so we could drop the GCPROs. As far as I know, nobody has complained, so we could drop the GCPROs now if you like. Perhaps we should hold a wake? Should I bring a bottle of poteen?