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: Merging scratch/no-purespace to remove unexec and purespace Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 09:30:18 +0000 Message-ID: <874j31bapy.fsf@protonmail.com> References: <87zfku6ra9.fsf@gmail.com> 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="27615"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Stefan Kangas , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier To: Helmut Eller Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 18 14:12:22 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 1tNtqg-0006y6-QD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 14:12:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tNtpp-0006n8-QL; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 08:11:29 -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 1tNqNx-0002Lp-9M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 04:30:30 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-10631.protonmail.ch ([79.135.106.31]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tNqNv-0006wq-6b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Dec 2024 04:30:29 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1734514223; x=1734773423; bh=DUAKV5M4w9ALCctd/ICNCttDFRv8aLkR/VEIsjARE2E=; 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=fUGPehZFdtOtBxmDeGGZbe5u/90TnRLNgxJi9hpTNVhWFDtSvXOO5sJM8qZxBAgtU 9kKusJ3t/Fl0EftdqDXJcQbLCGaKpuNGlq7VFDsL2VefhX4dM0PyjAkN8mPbibSGyu LXU82c1Oe4oAQwlwyQ5+a9DUd8oggP6O6IP3jUZ6QF2xBfjJUHJkNzl7OIO55WwOMV 1fzqMwtT0NLHX1ZLlEj+GfdxxH0pxlQTMa902TAOuc0iJdmvRhSCPAc4TAvd0GTBw8 m07wSMjGViSRtWNvRxTijOp6479yAQ2buY5LAZX+HwCvjGrRCz9DC8D3dMc3oKxRg7 08sa75SzXzy8Q== In-Reply-To: <87zfku6ra9.fsf@gmail.com> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 83eec22106712077d6d6faeaae12fc87823544a9 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=79.135.106.31; envelope-from=pipcet@protonmail.com; helo=mail-10631.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_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 08:11:25 -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:326647 Archived-At: "Helmut Eller" writes: > On Tue, Dec 17 2024, Stefan Kangas wrote: > > [...] >> We, the maintainers, believe that the scratch/no-purespace branch is >> now ready to merge, and would appreciate any final feedback, testing, >> and code reviews. Specifically, the branch has been primarily tested >> on GNU/Linux and macOS, so testing on other systems would be greatly >> appreciated. > > Do you have an estimate what removing purespace will cost in terms of GC > time? I mean something like "1ms per collection". Or perhaps a > suggestion how I could measure it? "Close to zero" is the best I can do at this time. In particular, that implies "not catastrophically worse", which is all that is relevant right now, IMHO. > I mean something like "1ms per collection". Or perhaps a > suggestion how I could measure it? I think that all the previously-pure data should be available right away after starting an Emacs session, so maybe something like: perf record -e cycles ./src/emacs -Q --batch --eval '(dotimes (i 1000) (garbage-collect)))' would be one data point. Some effects would only be visible in GCs with deep call stacks, or in large sessions, but that's hard to measure. Pip