From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Split `simple.el'? Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:50:58 +0300 Message-ID: <83d0zf4g8d.fsf@gnu.org> References: <5f1e960c-483f-4902-b4c2-b7a4ca3b04f4@default> <10c96362-297f-db97-d4a9-da3d66d4dd34@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1522824535 2636 195.159.176.226 (4 Apr 2018 06:48:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 06:48:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 04 08:48:51 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cDz-0000a0-1X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 08:48:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37960 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cG4-0007c7-Ge for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:51:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57779) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cFx-0007bw-Ls for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:50:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cFs-00057k-VX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:50:53 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:33735) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cFs-00057e-Rq; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:50:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3622 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1f3cFs-0003yZ-9G; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 02:50:48 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Paul Eggert on Tue, 3 Apr 2018 19:02:20 -0700) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:224306 Archived-At: > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 19:02:20 -0700 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > While we're on the subject, free_realized_fontsets uses an inefficient algorithm and is likely related to the > problem. So he might also try commenting out the body of free_realized_fontsets and seeing what happens. > > Or better yet he could profile Emacs, either at a high level or via --enable-profiling. I indeed think we should consider the code in free_realized_fontsets a possible culprit only if the profile shows it uses some significant portion of CPU time in this case (or some other real-life case). Based on where that function is called from, I don't immediately understand why would it be a hot spot when looking for fonts.