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: igc, macOS avoiding signals Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 10:53:38 +0000 Message-ID: <87v7v11lzb.fsf@protonmail.com> References: <799DDBC5-2C14-4476-B1E0-7BA2FE9E7901@toadstyle.org> <86ed1rswup.fsf@gnu.org> <87h66loc17.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="20454"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= , Eli Zaretskii , spd@toadstyle.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Helmut Eller Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 30 13:00:51 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 1tSES2-00059I-Jr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 13:00:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tSEQx-0006dx-8p; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 06:59:43 -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 1tSDPA-0003H1-RF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 05:53:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-10630.protonmail.ch ([79.135.106.30]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tSDP9-0001Z7-14 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 05:53:48 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1735556023; x=1735815223; bh=YENvTXIhJR5RFMxOT1MIq4G1inCjopPTokuBCgmZ2Ac=; 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=A7Ur0mcaLXPmJ16iWTJRPg5wll1tQ8gKwG8HChbHDpe+9AM9aUUeU91TFT/3o2oMr Vsj8GLwYvAJMjJwYlMesv2K2/omoyQdqhm7+IDy98re5DOwvrWg3123OjqDPYlTHyy KiGaWu4eHlUEn1s64LjirNy0ZITUs5nh1RbBC/Vzolwc2yr0+/8/mQAINBAqAmcyy0 4HCVaoqjCwj0Uo3j2phUdHpJfLJhiJiAy+4S5ig8kY7PybH3eBpESjR6NpCgi7uQAf Upft5GYciZ9UQ4yCUe4yZ4kTHxFhaVPLIOztuSvsmRbvfpKTYMMKQlSaQmtaf1HdGl JdC19xTvdziAQ== In-Reply-To: <87h66loc17.fsf@gmail.com> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 2a31c79b8d513d753d3c83dcbd12994747d373db Received-SPF: pass client-ip=79.135.106.30; envelope-from=pipcet@protonmail.com; helo=mail-10630.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=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_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: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 06:59:40 -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:327411 Archived-At: "Helmut Eller" writes: > On Mon, Dec 30 2024, Gerd M=C3=B6llmann wrote: >> Anyway, it definitely seems to be the case that MPS is _not_ running GCs >> concurrently, unless it would do things that I find highly unlikely. >> >> I find that a bit, let's say, disappointing, TBH :-(. > > Richard Brooksby thinks[*] that MPS could be concurrent with software > barriers. Feel like going down that road? :-) I saw that, but it's from 2008, so I'm not sure whether things changed after that. Note that for typical Emacs usage, I'd look into making the stop-the-world phase of GC interruptible rather than nonexistent. MPS has a lot of code to deal with failed scans, so we could find one of those code paths that fails non-catastrophically and fail it. That we didn't make the old GC interruptible still seems like a mistake to me, but for igc it means that we'll be able to pass that off as a new feature. Kind of like purespace, the old code we compare again always had a hand tied behind its back. (Helmut very impressively demonstrated that for purespace, so this assumes he doesn't get around to implementing interruptible mark-and-sweep GC before breakfast). Pip