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: Concurrency via isolated process/thread Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2023 12:45:59 +0000 Message-ID: <87r0pjc2k8.fsf@localhost> References: <871qhnr4ty.fsf@localhost> <83v8ezk3cj.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8ezpov0.fsf@localhost> <83r0pnk2az.fsf@gnu.org> <87pm57pns8.fsf@localhost> <87lefvp55t.fsf@yahoo.com> <87sfa28ura.fsf@localhost> <87cz16o8vz.fsf@yahoo.com> <87jzve8r4m.fsf@localhost> <871qhmo5nv.fsf@yahoo.com> <87bkgq8p5t.fsf@localhost> <831qhmjwk0.fsf@gnu.org> <875y6y8nlr.fsf@localhost> <87h6qhnalc.fsf@yahoo.com> <87ilax71wo.fsf@localhost> <831qhli14t.fsf@gnu.org> <87wmzdxewc.fsf@localhost> <87mt08in0p.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17204"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 07 14:46:48 2023 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 1qHkrI-0004KE-9i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2023 14:46:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qHkql-0003Qk-BO; Fri, 07 Jul 2023 08:46:15 -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 1qHkqd-0003QJ-80 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2023 08:46:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qHkqW-0005ax-TQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2023 08:46:05 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7AF6240029 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2023 14:45:59 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1688733959; bh=KjIdqRI1v36RtR6qj7LgAocNqai9FqDU5tcdRou7tjg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=pVcNaQzYfWZVVjJSh6PAbott8XqunRFoGZJ5BLp9hbUaOVh5kmw+EZ6Ap58SkVw7L ni6wkx2vmKP/XKlTPz3LH9qDGYlObOxkBXRzzbISbEaU9kFwqCFrNzYX7TUZY48Fn9 T34C87ZPwJv3eVaio2FglNlY6b2cxJQnwhlp0KipognkR5eraHGNb1h1B21i0x0jHz j6ppIU3R8AGzUT5e2svmwOy6NMmllTAz/wTNJ+pd10IvAC/XVYQEtNKOF8OVdpaO0P huTzfh0ylM6bkbU5ZJSw+ySUJKMD9ogSC0gSnrddqWpGq1GDrovuqDU/UfEOrw0/a2 xEqje/FW3MLmQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4QyCn26ZGzz9rxL; Fri, 7 Jul 2023 14:45:58 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <87mt08in0p.fsf@yahoo.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout01.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_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 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:307564 Archived-At: Po Lu writes: > Ihor Radchenko writes: > >> 3.37% emacs emacs [.] allocate_vectorlike >> 2.90% emacs emacs [.] buf_charpos_to_bytepos >> 2.82% emacs emacs [.] find_interval > > Out of all those functions, I think only these three will require some > form of interlocking. So assuming that the Org parser is being run > concurrently, less than 10% of it will be unable to run simultaneously. No, the whole buffer will need to be locked for modification for the duration of the parsing. Or the parser state info about AST buffer positions will be broken. But my point was not about the details of how Org parser works. I just wanted to show that memory allocation is not necessarily negligible. Is it slow enough to block interlocking idea? Maybe, maybe not. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at