From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: igc, macOS avoiding signals Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 16:31:28 +0100 Message-ID: References: <799DDBC5-2C14-4476-B1E0-7BA2FE9E7901@toadstyle.org> <87h66loc17.fsf@gmail.com> <878qrxoayj.fsf@gmail.com> <8734i5o6wc.fsf@gmail.com> <87cyh9mpn5.fsf@gmail.com> <874j2l1hei.fsf@protonmail.com> <874j2lmd37.fsf@gmail.com> <87msgdkt29.fsf@gmail.com> <86h66lnjrt.fsf@gnu.org> <868qrxnfrw.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5ccl2zx.fsf@gmail.com> <86msgcm1nm.fsf@gnu.org> <874j2jga33.fsf@gmail.com> 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="20800"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , pipcet@protonmail.com, 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 Tue Dec 31 16:32:28 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 1tSeEN-0005IK-QV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 16:32:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tSeDd-0006KJ-1r; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:31:41 -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 1tSeDZ-0006Jx-S4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:31:38 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ej1-x636.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::636]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tSeDW-0006Xa-Ct; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:31:36 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ej1-x636.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-aaee2c5ee6eso973256466b.1; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:31:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1735659091; x=1736263891; darn=gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=4hp1OB+zhUErtTGqDCBtKDqej3RvcDtl7Js//OAf9kI=; b=OTZw/HBMmI9hxg620b+2+WV8nnbYTpIc3Q6Q5NjBN4KgaqHKrdBUJS4zDP82DtG602 aEXSK0ysSbONRedVnIUMi66O7Woy3mrU/CEFaU2VCxeras1X1rZowm6N6DH8IQgAAXe3 AnYAeKDWsw+uRCtTglB+P1MOgl2f/IsnIMGp/LcfeVOmzICW4jLR3CaLHivDFxre+vQ4 mA7j9yUAhcooslQ9Izf4s7oYZUssYDVI2MryhVZRa+y6oZ1zoFlRzv9VOeysqaDKSA9E TOpwo4UCQri31EgPbFoVPxNAOhgn5WjhNC+iiX8eMI5/eJLgqcyAvgcptS2Esb758QEl PSLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1735659091; x=1736263891; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=4hp1OB+zhUErtTGqDCBtKDqej3RvcDtl7Js//OAf9kI=; b=wztPVgmFVumnBvmXlEc7x+S/3v6HZYDg/vKNaMHel1ifK1Z5i8sc2q35y60lqbRGfU SEd4eqftzUcNo6KdPy+SfLwemjHM214ieCtPJjE8WV9C329DO2jq4dGeD17q/9bLHnUq 7SG9OUbFglLLMvNkMN2G90vDNDxT0cIU0skK1DdOj9P6mccbPeEzKLpIVQGd58DiOabF 7qL9+G3sBo14QMyliJhr2L5cluLfq3tljJHalqBuG+QcjR6j7NcNpAZZfxc3lVbIUe4f w5aArHC4jgodPOAUS8ovPUIKSOfCdZ1rDA0oLozIP5xMWTE+EPu6tUHWC3vb52KIG2xo BrLw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCW1LbkJmsO4nqV+a/Z1Z7oAAXuW+qjjubHxTawCZ/rBmV+YGPhNm0x/MOM1l3vRLMDbQRhrnMiwjJiupA==@gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywd8yLndTdrKSVwyfrz83N41WGMarGeZI3D5dJxJyBrgc/1S9Co zpPBprryPyzoucU3DmMy2I0Z/vIsH3+RGDbwWYpOCFy+eeu1Yhibc0VCTw== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncv5v7gfVY7e/yIvTmrjsk/AJ0yfytgpNAC56AduPbQ8Z+89JiQpMdP1URhizWl Gsp76LMunIizQGR2vlUqh5ERpVHhn2UqvFwbl/P6z5EKe/uzFD1ltRLpi1XHkvk2pAFPnzmvve1 fpeLMrrHSatA9msxDP+Ihk6qQbmfFeNCYJTeoy6AzqY3Ye9E1Cyc2x940BUkCPbwVWFgI4S0uBt CZ3uD/EMCF1vmVVghKjfHgYVNg1BVKgk4xzvPd0CWebPVjhLPfUB7xZLd29AS/UbiHovXP9RrLR WDWQzXDvDrgfODEPbpAbgijfKmvE4CT5dHOVliVgXLtn7YSO0ZyYomI4LMuUDrtk1Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF1r8B/UhuYzXNqbqu+/q0ltDqEilZVDzTyuhryvski5GDYVGIcLTY7LRQ3UMQlOaTzeyHiIQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:3f1d:b0:aab:d7ef:d44 with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-aac2d326ba8mr3565576766b.24.1735659090725; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:31:30 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from pro2 (p200300e0b7216c0021e5e367c6afc189.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:e0:b721:6c00:21e5:e367:c6af:c189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-aac0f06e0c3sm1578990066b.199.2024.12.31.07.31.29 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:31:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <874j2jga33.fsf@gmail.com> (Helmut Eller's message of "Tue, 31 Dec 2024 16:12:48 +0100") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::636; envelope-from=gerd.moellmann@gmail.com; helo=mail-ej1-x636.google.com 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=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: 2.1.29 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:327531 Archived-At: Helmut Eller writes: > On Tue, Dec 31 2024, Gerd M=C3=B6llmann wrote: > [...] >> We have established that calling get_backtrace is safe since it doesn't >> access memory in our AMC pool, which might have a barrier. Counter >> argument was that one would have to know too much about what is safe to >> access and what cannot, and that would be unmaintainable. > > I thought, the problem with this was, that writing GC roots in SIGPROF > is not safe: if we have interrupted MPS it may have partly scanned roots > or somthing like that. Is that not a problem? I think you meant reading roots. We're reading the binding stack which is a root. >From my POV, that has the same problem that we currently have already. The binding stack may be inconsistent because SIGPROF hits at the wrong place, with a small probability. With MPS, it might be a problem that the root is currently exact IIRC, but it could be made ambiguous, if MPS is fixing addresses, in which case I think we'd be safe. I'm too lazy to look at the code, ATM, because I find the process_pending_singals more attractive.