From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: GC mark stack Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2022 10:01:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="30461"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel To: Lynn Winebarger Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 15 16:06:29 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 1oNajc-0007ic-7m for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 16:06:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51130 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oNajb-0001Pv-7U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 10:06:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:32958) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oNafn-0007oo-RA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 10:02:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:26690) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oNafg-0000lV-EJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 10:02:27 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0E17344099B; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 10:02:23 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AB2994409A3; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 10:02:21 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1660572141; bh=FLYhHWSsHs1/QrfqJu2KEpI9EWC5vbryIr0j9JjZiyY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=pwioag1Pw2ObQTyk3OdXqKbDmAuNdwHj4BhNnr8eBYkiufa1YuBn895x0iuiJPVAr H0Ov38GXkVdNu/+Xo79fZyih4SW4X58q8DSN/dhLhL+YsII7pO06roRJpJ6sZhImVF /64nQ1N8ssX9ENH0mSU0BdyzMcAFPLrs9+32yFYNyMK7Uo/eXVtBLeGarMt3dg2UA0 RkYlLwHO2THxh4tpASJ9NT5Qm7thxfkwCSJ1QQm9a9q/LLwls6K8BLWI4h0Lt4wMwk MGhQdK959jLJI8Ai1bf3DtFRR5z4taODMxNl01gkhgJuGt8HMBs2lpIT/2FoD12fhk cdziClBf+uoYw== Original-Received: from lechazo (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 960AD120377; Mon, 15 Aug 2022 10:02:21 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Lynn Winebarger's message of "Sun, 26 Jun 2022 11:31:43 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -30 X-Spam_score: -3.1 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.1 / 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_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URI_DOTEDU=1.246 autolearn=ham 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:293481 Archived-At: Lynn Winebarger [2022-06-26 11:31:43] wrote: > I was reviewing alloc.c in the 28.1 source, and noted that it uses a > semi-naive computation of the transitive closure of the graph of live > data structures (weak hash tables is where I see it). > Since the fix to https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=54698 > (commit 7a8798de95a57c8ff85f070075e0a0176b458578) moved to using an > explicit stack, I was curious if you'd considered using a variant of > Tarjan's SCC algorithm, such as the one described in > http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.40.9019&rep=rep1&type=pdf I must admit that I don't understand what you're referring to. And seeing the lack of response by other people, I suspect I'm not alone. Are you talking about the code in `mark_and_sweep_weak_table_contents`? Maybe the `do .. while` loop? Stefan