From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MPS: profiler Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 20:02:42 +0000 Message-ID: <87a5je3vz1.fsf@localhost> References: <87v823xvq1.fsf@localhost> <86cyobmmhc.fsf@gnu.org> <87r0crxung.fsf@localhost> <87le2zxsqx.fsf@localhost> <8634p6n7jd.fsf@gnu.org> <87tthm3gq2.fsf@gmail.com> <87sex6ags5.fsf@localhost> <87msne3flr.fsf@gmail.com> <87frt63dvt.fsf@gmail.com> <86o77ulgk8.fsf@gnu.org> <868qyyl73z.fsf@gnu.org> <87v822uvjt.fsf@localhost> <877ceinn89.fsf@localhost> <874j9mnlre.fsf@localhost> 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="33149"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , eller.helmut@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 21 22:01:51 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 1sKkSF-0008TF-D2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 22:01:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sKkRb-0002HW-Eo; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 16:01:11 -0400 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 1sKkRW-0002Gz-BY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 16:01:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sKkRS-0000w1-EF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 16:01:05 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADA60240101 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 22:00:59 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1719000060; bh=QOwObDM5HmsK5UvQGWC97Up6fmk3lAggdwRamb0A2OI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From; b=Q0a/ANeOPTtJ8PuTxVwjOfnBNA5Rv6vO8NSvMp2aN7RHX7oKrrfPHbWe2KufgTWA9 BPpmTdIbO7kJGIak1bBAEKu/lgcB+HnJaNXLjBRsKaZs8pZN5pLPQdjyaE24YuftOg qajYYNJMiQUlQ5s0TGRedijgYfTrQof54r56N+Ip82L5BYCFjE5hDVOD0A+yDepi0s YnsWJzgHesTOSaB3sqf67m7u3C1aMrIxdfYLeqDmQKtIB61wqTkSoeqMzPlzRHThPh Rdn+lWQekSwzxguEkDgnxRWw9hBnVwu6GUrtCyFqZgYeHcJ6dLNG3CV25LimN80X6S exzvGn8M0UUIw== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4W5SsQ4hgNz9rxF; Fri, 21 Jun 2024 22:00:58 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:320444 Archived-At: Gerd M=C3=B6llmann writes: > Ihor Radchenko writes: > >>> What do you mean by blocking? Igc ignores things like >>> inhibit_garbage_collection. >> >> My understanding is that MPS sometimes needs to stop Emacs, just like >> the traditional GC does. And I was hoping to see how frequently such >> stopping happens in practice compared to old GC. So, I fired the >> profiler and saw the above output. >> >> Now, the question is whether the profiler output wrt "Automatic GC" on >> scratch/igc branch represent the moments when Emacs is being properly >> frozen. > > Simply said no. Then, we should probably not record the times when MPS is active as "Automatic GC" in the profiler. Maybe simply skip these samples for the time being (with a FIXME in the code)? That would be more accurate. > MPS telemetry could perhaps be used, not sure, and it would of course > need someone to do it :-). We will eventually need some kind of telemetry to compare traditional GC vs. MPS. Of course, getting things work reliably is more important at this stage. --=20 Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at