From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#21028: Performance regression in revision af1a69f4d17a482c359d98c00ef86fac835b5fac (Apr 2014). Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 22:53:35 +0200 Message-ID: <83r320c300.fsf@gnu.org> References: <559F9FAF.8090708@live.com> <831sz0sfug.fsf@gnu.org> <83oa095eaw.fsf@gnu.org> <83lgvd581m.fsf@gnu.org> <83a8br6hq0.fsf@gnu.org> <672a0c69-4352-735f-cba4-025e642626ea@gmail.com> <83vauf50wb.fsf@gnu.org> <7408d59c-92ba-b879-5ac1-3cd5eee9b4db@gmail.com> <83tw9z4zzp.fsf@gnu.org> <2cad0da9-c931-b547-07bb-efec2f2bcf1f@gmail.com> <83h95w0w3p.fsf@gnu.org> <27853273-e6d8-077e-b9e0-b2bec2fe1fae@gmail.com> <834m1v2630.fsf@gnu.org> <1c224dc1-bd71-a910-b7cf-00313e4aec40@live.com> <83efy2cx5n.fsf@gnu.org> <3c3e8384-3412-f5a5-3ab2-a7eb4e699f1c@live.com> <83d1dmcrnl.fsf@gnu.org> <39fe847e-ef8a-149f-4478-d02e7c794c9a@live.com> <837f3tch7y.fsf@gnu.org> <1e7bc066-3f29-3897-5039-de7233efc58a@live.com> <83y3w9ay6y.fsf@gnu.org> <16f9db27-dd0f-ddaf-2f34-45b9fd4e69c6@live.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1489438513 31206 195.159.176.226 (13 Mar 2017 20:55:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 20:55:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 21028@debbugs.gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 13 21:55:08 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWzi-0007Q6-Qk for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 21:55:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54360 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWzp-0001in-22 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:55:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32845) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWzi-0001iW-Ps for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:55:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWze-0006R5-SI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:55:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:56166) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWze-0006R1-P4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:55:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWze-0000HX-GB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:55:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 20:55:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 21028 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 21028-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B21028.14894384551026 (code B ref 21028); Mon, 13 Mar 2017 20:55:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 21028) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Mar 2017 20:54:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54365 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWyt-0000GT-3t for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:54:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41723) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWyq-0000GF-6E for 21028@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:54:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWyg-0006A0-MG for 21028@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:54:06 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:53034) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWyg-00069v-Hr; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:54:02 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3748 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cnWye-0006rx-Q8; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 16:54:02 -0400 In-reply-to: <16f9db27-dd0f-ddaf-2f34-45b9fd4e69c6@live.com> (message from =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Mon, 13 Mar 2017 15:04:24 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:130558 Archived-At: > Cc: 21028@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 15:04:24 -0400 > > > I see nothing of the kind, as you saw. With the same fonts as you > > use. So it's definitely not a problem with the fonts. Which is > > strange, since the profiles you provided seem to indicate a > > font-related problem. > > We know the exact commit that caused this regression, right? So how could the problem not be font-related, since reverting it fixes the problem? Because using the same fonts here doesn't reproduce the problem. Which means that the font data is not the culprit, there's some other factor at work here. > > Is this the complete fontset setup you are using […] If it is, I will try to reproduce using this fontset. > > No, not exactly. The full thing is at https://github.com/cpitclaudel/.emacs.d/blob/master/init/fonts.el#L7, but the problem is reproducible in a clean install an a much simpler set up. Thanks, I will try using one of these, maybe it will help me reproduce the problem. > What about the VM approach, or simply remote access on a VM that I could provide? Debugging display problems without seeing the display is not practical. > Do you want to reproduce the problem to debug it locally, or something else? If the former, it there nothing I could do to help? The former, of course. This happens in complicated code I know very little about, and no one else on board knows more. Stepping through the code with a debugger, comparing the "fast" path with the "slow" path is the only way to understand what is going on there. > Would it help if I tried to find other people who can reproduce the problem on their machines by following my VM-based reproduction steps? If they can debug the problem and explain why the slowdown is so massive, yes. Otherwise, we are back to square one.