From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Third Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Redisplay slower in Emacs 28 than Emacs 27 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:58:55 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87pn3lhcdd.fsf@gnus.org> <878sa9hbe2.fsf@gnus.org> <877dptfvae.fsf@gnus.org> <83czzl8qwu.fsf@gnu.org> <87sg8h78s8.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="10315"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 07 22:00:51 2020 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 1kmNcp-0002bm-BZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 22:00:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36848 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmNco-0000Do-DZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 16:00:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45346) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmNbF-0007vb-M8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 15:59:13 -0500 Original-Received: from outbound.soverin.net ([2a01:4f8:fff0:2d:8::218]:58895) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kmNbD-0003Ob-4n; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 15:59:13 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.soverin.net (unknown [10.10.3.24]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by outbound.soverin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E4D160157; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:58:59 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from smtp.soverin.net (smtp.soverin.net [159.69.232.138]) by soverin.net Original-Received: by breton.holly.idiocy.org (Postfix, from userid 501) id 1F63C2028662B4; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:58:55 +0000 (GMT) Mail-Followup-To: Alan Third , Gregory Heytings , Lars Ingebrigtsen , Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a01:4f8:fff0:2d:8::218; envelope-from=alan@idiocy.org; helo=outbound.soverin.net X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:260517 Archived-At: On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 06:49:22PM +0000, Gregory Heytings via Emacs development discussions. wrote: > > > > That being said, it seems to me that this slowdown is avoidable. > > > Lars considers that the minor modification he made should not have > > > changed anything. > > > > Would it be possible for you to run the benchmarks on the current trunk, > > with and without that "!"? Because I just don't understand why > > disabling the image cache would make Emacs slower. > > > > Sure, I'll do that. Could you also try with this patch: @@ -2351,7 +2356,7 @@ lookup_image (struct frame *f, Lisp_Object spec, int face_id) /* Look up SPEC in the hash table of the image cache. */ hash = sxhash (spec); - img = search_image_cache (f, spec, hash, foreground, background, true); + img = search_image_cache (f, spec, hash, foreground, background, false); if (img && img->load_failed_p) { free_image (f, img); It's a definite mistake on my part and may affect the caching of images, although I can't see any way that it would slow anything down. -- Alan Third