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 12:30:16 +0000 Message-ID: <87wmzbc3af.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> <83r0plgjeo.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7kpxapo.fsf@localhost> <83mt09gcaf.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18339"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 07 14:31:36 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 1qHkcZ-0004Zp-Mc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2023 14:31:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qHkbf-0005PG-Sq; Fri, 07 Jul 2023 08:30:39 -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 1qHkbe-0005P6-A3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2023 08:30:38 -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 1qHkbP-00007L-Qr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Jul 2023 08:30:38 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1E33240028 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2023 14:30:16 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1688733016; bh=35B2yzReQ2QJk+1z4IyodzkCTN9nztpjoh03S6OT/0E=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=bg60d3o4wKUeIXOXFo02ZQl8lVI0XNgxgBztlxGrIZRMEMmjtNlFJQX3tQS5afC1v 8w91uJUo30+18iDy4w6PYUZIrEyA3p/Z/oOjHlq/hIJmlahTJ1r1xRUMoM7Hu5YJLL WvOVqAROeqNdGTVJpl4VbXtET2BtUH91TOsfY0sgZmwx4EkXT3/K8fRAanf5PYyCX7 QbrSbcfxVCPL6pfwP/tfn/2iS5N+x6zRhrCrzCfltwzFUWmZLPpGbQOg2eT9fONY5L gx+rh9trPP51zw4i9wdXMULHoMcQ/RMracSscdsEGeM0uXK3OAUQhcOiV5ZtmTD9tt ZJKBDCApwXPhQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4QyCQw0Xdyz9rxF; Fri, 7 Jul 2023 14:30:15 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <83mt09gcaf.fsf@gnu.org> 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, 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:307561 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> So, my efforts did reduce the time spent in allocate_vectorlike. >> Note, however, that these two datapoints differ more than just by how >> memory is allocated. >> >> But 5% CPU time spend allocating memory is not insignificant. > > Once again, it isn't necessarily memory allocation per se. For > example, it could be find_suspicious_object_in_range, called from > allocate_vectorlike. I did not have ENABLE_CHECKING in this benchmark. It is just ./configure --with-native-compilation So, find_suspicious_object_in_range should not run at all. >> Sure. Though my argument was less about how long Emacs spends allocating >> memory and more about how frequently a typical Elisp code requests such >> allocations. I have a gut feeling that even if taking short time, >> frequent interrupts may create intermittent typing delays. > > I very much doubt these interrupts are because Emacs waits for memory > allocation. I guess we can be optimistic. And if not, maybe need to have multiple heaps. >> If a thread is working with a temporary buffer and locks it, that >> buffer has almost 0 chance to be accessed by another thread. > > But "working on a buffer" requires access and modification of many > global structures. Just walk the code in set-buffer and its > subroutines, and you will see that. I was only able to identify the following: interrupt_input_blocked current_buffer last_known_column_point AFAIU, current_buffer might be made thread-local and last_known_column_point can be made buffer-local. interrupt_input_blocked is more tricky. But it is just one global state variable. Surely we can find a solution to make it work with multiple threads. >> Same with variables - even if some global variable needs to be locked, >> it is unlikely that it will need to be accessed by another thread. > > I think you misunderstand the frequency of such collisions. > case-fold-search comes to mind. How so? What is the problem with a buffer-local variable that is rarely set directly (other than by major modes)? let-binding is common, but it is not a problem. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at