From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Time to merge scratch/correct-warning-pos into master, perhaps? Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 14:06:59 +0000 Message-ID: References: <83mtjwzwkb.fsf@gnu.org> <87r198ytog.fsf@gnus.org> <87lezfzy5h.fsf@gnus.org> <83sftnyilw.fsf@gnu.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="38280"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 16 15:08:15 2022 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 1n96Cc-0009ow-Ps for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 15:08:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50556 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n96Cb-0003aI-Go for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 09:08:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:59562) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n96BX-0002qO-02 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 09:07:07 -0500 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:57364 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n96BU-0001QV-BM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 09:07:06 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 27682 invoked by uid 3782); 16 Jan 2022 14:07:03 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p2e5d50dc.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [46.93.80.220]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 15:07:02 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 32276 invoked by uid 1000); 16 Jan 2022 14:06:59 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83sftnyilw.fsf@gnu.org> X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de Received-SPF: pass client-ip=193.149.48.1; envelope-from=acm@muc.de; helo=mail.muc.de 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_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:284817 Archived-At: Hello, Eli. On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 14:23:39 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > > Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 13:02:34 +0100 > > Cc: Alan Mackenzie , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > > > And a "time make -j8 bootstrap check" takes > > A better benchmark is something like the following, since we're > > interested in byte compilation speed and not the rest: > > time for i in `seq 1 10`; do rm lisp/gnus/*.elc lisp/org/*.elc; make -j8; done > > This is 17% slower on my build machine on the branch compared to master. > Since this is glaringly inconsistent with the timings Alan published, > I think it would be a good idea to measure the difference for each of > the*.el files, because it could be that a couple of outliers skew the > entire picture. That is, put the 'time' command inside the 'do', and > don't use -j8; then compare the outputs. On the branch, the byte compiler is doing more work than on master. My timings from yesterday were about the speed of Emacs in daily use rather than while compiling. I'm surprised to see the difference at 17%, though. My bootstrap on the branch is just 7% - 8% slower than on master. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).