From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Pip Cet via "Emacs development discussions." Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Some experience with the igc branch Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 13:19:26 +0000 Message-ID: <8734idb4nj.fsf@protonmail.com> References: <87o713wwsi.fsf@telefonica.net> <87pllicrpi.fsf@protonmail.com> <864j2u442i.fsf@gnu.org> <87ldw6as5f.fsf@protonmail.com> <86o7112rnq.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Pip Cet Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22010"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , ofv@wanadoo.es, emacs-devel@gnu.org, eller.helmut@gmail.com, acorallo@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 24 14:25:51 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 1tQ4v0-0005U1-9P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 24 Dec 2024 14:25:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tQ4uM-0005xa-GF; Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:25:12 -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 1tQ4oy-00050J-Ig for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:19:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-4322.protonmail.ch ([185.70.43.22]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tQ4ow-0005Mw-VH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:19:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1735046371; x=1735305571; bh=Q7xBxc84nf5uwkI8Q4xDWg3V4ql6ANLNeeS4HNabV2M=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector:List-Unsubscribe:List-Unsubscribe-Post; b=kLrDcXzWD9rDKAwX51d62ZG8lBbimMOfSjxSwxn2r7wRrnxolnsfX0db3UPxFk0Xg lS2Me1iNuC3UlntPkKX0p4RdPvNlsO/65zy7WkJTLKEcQU6IxkWE4xPb+ZbAkhSIRA m+2JCWPgeZXAsJvj1cRmURKd3WvpDSx5YwHBPhPaO62BQc3pDssjjiRDo3Mrfl/Icy Wp3ormvQk5OxNjc/KJga+J73/RFsvIvPyW9OjIBr/d489gSzPf4HOZ4UALWnMOzkOd 0zTQHiNmcCsH2Oq0wMu2KnviZvVlEbihfmLzk5xs4g7pggiXLyz0qLXcacw2lWxhL9 sdVzhI5x9+BIw== In-Reply-To: Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 5a1ce60fc03bfa4d54dd5be58b172def147cdb2b Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.43.22; envelope-from=pipcet@protonmail.com; helo=mail-4322.protonmail.ch 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_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:25:07 -0500 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:327007 Archived-At: Gerd M=C3=B6llmann writes: > I'm using SIGPROF below to make it more concrete. Similar for other > signals. > > The idea is to get the backtrace in the SIGPROF handler, without > accessing Lisp data. That can be done, as I've tried to show. I don't understand. We need to access the specpdl, which I consider Lisp data, and certainly the backtrace includes data which can only be generated using MPS-managed memory. > Then place that backtrace somewhere. I still think it's better to copy the specpdl, since that allows us to generate the "backtrace" (whatever we choose to use for that) in Lisp. If we spend too much time allocating short-lived data which triggers too many GCs, we want to know what to fix in the Lisp code. Honestly, though, it doesn't matter much, does it? > That's only one example architectures, of course. One can use something > else, like queues that are handled by another thread, one doesn't need a > scheduler thread, and so on, and so on. Pip's work queue is an > example. That's Helmut's code, not mine. Pip