From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Elisp native profiler Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 22:11:46 -0700 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <506BC912.4000308@cs.ucla.edu> References: <5069CA0D.1080801@cs.ucla.edu> <1349123390.31932.1@faina> <506A8C86.5010102@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1349241152 11781 80.91.229.3 (3 Oct 2012 05:12:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 05:12:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Development To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 03 07:12:37 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TJHFQ-0002hN-RP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 07:11:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38800 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TJHFL-0004wM-4k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 01:11:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35299) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TJHFI-0004wD-MA for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 01:11:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TJHFH-0004XG-OG for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 01:11:44 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.62]:35065) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TJHFH-0004XC-I3 for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2012 01:11:43 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35A6439E8013; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 22:11:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smtp.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tfAbwlB6qWZB; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 22:11:42 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.3] (pool-108-23-119-2.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [108.23.119.2]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CEFF539E800E; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 22:11:42 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120912 Thunderbird/15.0.1 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 131.179.128.62 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153983 Archived-At: On 10/02/2012 06:03 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: > What is an "overrun" exactly? Is it when the signal gets blocked > because we're still in the signal handler? Close. It's when a signal gets discarded because the same signal is already pending; this can occur when the signal is being blocked, and the signal can be blocked because we're in the signal handler. It's the performance figures, not the overruns, that were the real eye-opener. Going with a 1 ms sampling interval made Emacs 3x slower. Going with 10 ms made Emacs run nearly at full speed. That's a strong argument for going with 10 ms.