From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: igc, macOS avoiding signals Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 15:27:07 +0200 Message-ID: <86ldvwm190.fsf@gnu.org> References: <799DDBC5-2C14-4476-B1E0-7BA2FE9E7901@toadstyle.org> <874j2lmd37.fsf@gmail.com> <87msgdkt29.fsf@gmail.com> <86h66lnjrt.fsf@gnu.org> <868qrxnfrw.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5ccl2zx.fsf@gmail.com> <875xn0p3l1.fsf@protonmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10273"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: eller.helmut@gmail.com, gerd.moellmann@gmail.com, spd@toadstyle.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Pip Cet Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 31 14:28:01 2024 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 1tScHx-0002YZ-58 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 14:28:01 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tScHB-000633-FW; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 08:27:13 -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 1tScHA-00062c-2r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 08:27:12 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tScH9-0000XF-Ad; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 08:27:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=MSn1j/j9mNhaXhK4FUuNum/uhel3Hll/K0vwOHW6LU8=; b=c85BInKSvKlhNYie9h7N hFFQL9IbKVOzG5sbaXbHb+EoactWgUr1C6S8pdiS12ua1P4AtquWT8B9PGcqMQ8yKJuxewRSoJYip VQlfIramJvemFkYblpO1GbUBw+n+Hy4Kxw7uesrkUVkqM8d8Cg2GcOF4qPGiM5Q0J60MYvm0zTwzI Yf3QQMZYQin773WNuLvadQy+/2b6X4MMT5WYmc+sv8qhrV8R1BLuL/+yblz9MEpQ2BxWlc02IDyZa nierdRg+JnPTr4k9IhvQoL4gN8RH/+ibJzMlb2K8bvhbBbC/lt5PyYb1TdxxTV6ja1QvbFT0lC5H2 /6AqtarrowVtiw==; In-Reply-To: <875xn0p3l1.fsf@protonmail.com> (message from Pip Cet on Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:09:25 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:327501 Archived-At: > Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:09:25 +0000 > From: Pip Cet > Cc: Gerd Möllmann , Eli Zaretskii , spd@toadstyle.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > "Helmut Eller" writes: > > > I wonder if the backtrace that we see in the signal handler is any > > different from the backrace that we would see at the next safe point > > (i.e. the next time maybe_quit is called). > > If we keep a shadow signal mask, the only requirement for a safe point > is that we made some progress OR the lock was released. But the > backtrace will change if we wait for the next maybe_quit, IIUC. > > maybe_quit is not a great safe point, it's just the best we have. It's > insufficient if Emacs becomes idle, and how often we call rarely_quit is > quite unpredictable. What about doing that from process_pending_signals?