From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Raeburn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: advice needed for multi-threading patch Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:28:19 -0400 Message-ID: <7CBF8DB5-75C0-4749-9219-F55ABE988BB0@raeburn.org> References: <9DE0B828-815B-45DA-BD2B-0AB4DAD59CE2@raeburn.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1251354610 11784 80.91.229.12 (27 Aug 2009 06:30:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:30:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Tom Tromey , Emacs development discussions To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 27 08:30:03 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MgYUj-0006U0-MB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:30:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59060 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MgYUj-00081X-0b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:30:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MgYTK-000710-VR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:28:35 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MgYTF-0006xZ-53 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:28:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35871 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MgYTE-0006xL-Pa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:28:28 -0400 Original-Received: from splat.raeburn.org ([69.25.196.39]:62708 helo=raeburn.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MgYT6-0008Kv-RY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:28:28 -0400 Original-Received: from [10.0.0.172] (squish.raeburn.org [10.0.0.172]) by raeburn.org (8.14.3/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n7R6SJsI014243; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:28:19 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:114669 Archived-At: On Aug 26, 2009, at 23:12, Stefan Monnier wrote: > Emacs's stack scanning already has to check both Lisp_Object values > (i.e. tagged pointers) and plain direct untagged pointers. This was > needed IIRC because even if the C code appears to hold on to > a Lisp_Object value, the optimizer may get rid of it and only keep the > untagged pointer. Does that mean that GC_USE_GCPROS_AS_BEFORE doesn't work reliably? If so, maybe we should get rid of it. (Though, it appears to be the default.) >> [...getting rid of struct Lisp_Symbol...] > > We'll cross that bridge when we get there. I think we'll find that > the > particular interface used by the function will be a very minor issue > (the whole function will probably need to be rewritten). Agreed. It wasn't particularly even important to bring up, except that I think Tom may be looking at changing related code. Ken