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 12:42:27 +0000 Message-ID: <87zfkdz6kl.fsf@protonmail.com> References: <799DDBC5-2C14-4476-B1E0-7BA2FE9E7901@toadstyle.org> <87h66loc17.fsf@gmail.com> <878qrxoayj.fsf@gmail.com> <8734i5o6wc.fsf@gmail.com> <87cyh9mpn5.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="29562"; 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 15:25:19 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 1tSGhr-0007Yx-Sj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 15:25:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tSGhh-00086S-9K; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 09:25:10 -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 1tSF6V-0002kb-TG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 07:42:40 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-40133.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.133]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tSF6T-0007BN-G9; Mon, 30 Dec 2024 07:42:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1735562551; x=1735821751; bh=g+UVoO9X5a+7S2bZqTngclPJGXZORWshShrJTmN05i0=; 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=PMTqPEz7KO+TL5I3bYnGSVlPsn8LUnhw0ksfiAi+8wwM+YJYz55HAeAVXJz4Y13kt tb2v9quCb9yQrIscWEOjFBrC9yRa4tzICxq2KZvhI8gvxJVT4qzP4Drjza8LH/9FrJ uXUEesCYgaNiNDCstXVPvoq+SxbcTzWwLug5SEbJy2O6eRJzDQ9MxXrHd+GnWktk0e GZ/3mcyM4Dh7k2eWx1cKqsgLBulEshhW8CT68FOl+82ZSwwiwHLCgajVLgiDLzQkJU XaZ8CObmEFx891O/Rx4rdL+GO+oZ9oPfIL2qc+8Emxc1Peqh6LHWYq2/fjhWStYK9D r3HWpqw+fhXhw== In-Reply-To: <87cyh9mpn5.fsf@gmail.com> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 3b8dff46f1c71d2aba364a0af34510985e5f47a8 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.133; envelope-from=pipcet@protonmail.com; helo=mail-40133.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_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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: Mon, 30 Dec 2024 09:25:05 -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:327427 Archived-At: Pip Cet writes: > "Helmut Eller" writes: >>> I find that difficult to understand. But it may be just a >>> statistical phenomenon. Maybe filling up an APs memory is so fast so >>> that the probability of a signal hitting while owning the mutex is clos= e >>> to zero, or something. >> >> Very few of Emacs' signal handlers actually touch a barrier. I've also > > Indeed. These crashes are rare in typical usage, which doesn't mean we > should delay fixing them until Emacs is "unstable enough". It already > is, IMHO, because we take that approach too frequently. > >> not seen any reproducable receipes for the "signal issues" that the igc >> branch supposedly has. > > Removing the SIGPROF protection code should allow Ihor's recipe to crash > again. Confirmed. Here's the recipe (which, yes, you have already seen): https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2024-06/msg00560.html Make igc_busy_p () return false (as we could do if the "supposed" signal issue weren't real), immediate crash. Pip