From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MPS: weak hash tables Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2024 17:09:23 +0300 Message-ID: <864j912t0s.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878qyeffjh.fsf@localhost> <8734olzlws.fsf@gmail.com> <867cdx32e3.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17564"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: pipcet@protonmail.com, eller.helmut@gmail.com, yantar92@posteo.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jul 07 16:09:47 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 1sQSaJ-0004Kk-6v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 07 Jul 2024 16:09:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sQSa2-0004fw-G8; Sun, 07 Jul 2024 10:09:30 -0400 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 1sQSZy-0004f8-L1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Jul 2024 10:09:26 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sQSZy-0006jJ-49; Sun, 07 Jul 2024 10:09:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=zznWfCHhkTzUAUIdLaUENGnEihaWBtETN7sGv57HOMs=; b=NMKOpF8OZYgO1YObEi7A WqImvr2w6qT73LBgk5etKXbaGR3XC0KWUuvcOrqafsnAq+9ZuAq858/XU7RFkM0rSufGLvxnwUtER ucVT9gCjlDtcAVlCTyrhBDZg5miOudc2c8FNXy8p/yiL5jsz9rqklm6v0BJMPimo2JA/T+xs7J/aw Qk/DgBsgEFvrVqdD+0Q6G8BWzyGjs4xUVcfZ6vceBLM3vwh4REHSjDy6keFY9yTp2S17LsXEza1HL XAfzbiK+wCUEup63Y8FM3pfgpQuo3iGrJGDlw1TjzqKGiPGvBi7bhgqeQKrcU2DWHVR9qEAxH0T8w VW7YwLLadJgG4A==; In-Reply-To: (message from Gerd =?utf-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= on Sun, 07 Jul 2024 13:19:09 +0200) 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:321487 Archived-At: > From: Gerd Möllmann > Cc: pipcet@protonmail.com, eller.helmut@gmail.com, yantar92@posteo.net, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2024 13:19:09 +0200 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> Balancing only changes the tree structure, without freeing nodes, AFAIR. > >> But that could be wrong. It's been a long time since I looked closer at > >> that tree. > > > > We free nodes in sweep_intervals. > > I think that is handled in igc.c by intervals becoming unreachable. They will not become unreachable unless we unchain them, as is done in sweep_intervals. Right?