From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.diffs,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 9227864: Further fix for aborts due to GC losing pseudovectors Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 13:46:22 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20200526060645.22243.34109@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20200526060646.662E120A2C@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <26b54430-b654-3e13-8e3c-2f4482af60e1@cs.ucla.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="77453"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Paul Eggert , emacs-diffs@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Pip Cet Original-X-From: emacs-diffs-bounces+gnu-emacs-diffs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue May 26 19:46:33 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: gnu-emacs-diffs@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 1jdder-000K4n-Qq for gnu-emacs-diffs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 19:46:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55574 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jddeq-00036f-Rc for gnu-emacs-diffs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 26 May 2020 13:46:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53850) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jddel-00036N-OQ; Tue, 26 May 2020 13:46:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:36381) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jddek-0002DN-94; Tue, 26 May 2020 13:46:26 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8A36D44096F; Tue, 26 May 2020 13:46:24 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1E5A244089F; Tue, 26 May 2020 13:46:23 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1590515183; bh=ce94BJwu8M11cJ7Zqs9RAjEcq3pD7ko94JAVKyAsMrE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=WyEz+vBPInaIeYoxdgmTUuVLx1Ts9E+fVCnUK5DLIwMFq4SCxhU8RxCtITdY0Dgaf b6Fgtbe8YfUk2Qzm5ASkDklKtvYhDsowkoPfdummkazdDIzw1wvpH29jPK3rlDlRTo 5rfuFFaqAWuizhKGWcjx/jbJfNGUqamXxzB97NkULuj8RiJKw1Xoh6fSEsxOE7oUeU PWeVb25bfQe0Xo6CQyzutVOzP/DXilZZb0ZOgY+lsXq8W0sY3+HtcNLDARU2BMSdmi hPmDbzEYDQFUruDMxHCdw6D1Wt3L0XKEyNKKSoFyGIrCieLN481GVo6nSd1urEcKiM w7ik52ukHxz8g== Original-Received: from milanesa (unknown [216.154.27.250]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D1AE11205E0; Tue, 26 May 2020 13:46:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Pip Cet's message of "Tue, 26 May 2020 17:25:38 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/26 10:38:24 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-diffs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Mailing list for Emacs changes List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-diffs-bounces+gnu-emacs-diffs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-diffs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.diffs:156334 gmane.emacs.devel:251468 Archived-At: > I guess the recent bugs also make it impossible to do a 32-bit > --wide-int USE_LSB_TAG build. Indeed. > My suspicion is that that would actually be faster, We had USE_LSB_TAGS for wide-int, originally, but experiments showed that for wide-int MSB_TAGs was slightly faster, presumably because the tagging/untagging is simpler. Speed was (so far) the only reason why we didn't use LSB_TAGs for wide-int. Stefan