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.bugs Subject: bug#75322: SAFE_ALLOCA assumed to root Lisp_Objects/SSDATA(string) Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 21:10:28 +0200 Message-ID: <86frlybdjv.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87jzbbke6u.fsf@protonmail.com> <86sepzf4h3.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5c6j0qn.fsf@protonmail.com> <86jzbad735.fsf@gnu.org> <877c7aha9n.fsf@protonmail.com> <86ttaebfwq.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="21875"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: pipcet@protonmail.com, 75322@debbugs.gnu.org To: Gerd =?UTF-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 04 20:11:15 2025 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1tU9YI-0005Zk-Tq for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 20:11:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tU9Y8-0005zH-EL; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:11:04 -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 1tU9Y6-0005yt-O7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:11:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tU9Y6-0005co-FM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:11:02 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=debbugs.gnu.org; s=debbugs-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:To:Subject; bh=1Z9FwLZNmDoc6ukFY/aOt+glTPVLPiAjlw+aZ7t6jag=; b=ATIrJJCPOrYUjU9RegXFyXr9MXrPMFDHGKoDJJ160lJVQucPNdPydRImOh3SQEHGrdjRpNuIs8beJfquF12huo0rCygt0SfG1xbplNxMNHlqGvkbam+BesdeVIDDoLQFfRzMDFlsfsdaKEhR3BkrMu3HwgG/lmX2byJTfPJqcS0i/pxu+psKYv4VBEoyjKeNIl0gB0UXRBCcbWZmK6/jVg7dP+1DRQfb1NRcJskESblWmER5jZWHnRg/sB/yU47RDmdAg8loJjarHGlHLq/1zlkG0qXwkpICWWHEYWZMe2UIFHhTZwpjdAF1zP1F6QX9S9mjnjKHy6YEywvTrKSqeQ==; Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tU9Y6-000866-9s for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:11:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 19:11:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 75322 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 75322-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B75322.173601784031094 (code B ref 75322); Sat, 04 Jan 2025 19:11:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 75322) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jan 2025 19:10:40 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57406 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tU9Xk-00085S-1S for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:10:40 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36700) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tU9Xh-00085E-8h for 75322@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:10:37 -0500 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 1tU9Xb-0004h6-VJ; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 14:10:31 -0500 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=1Z9FwLZNmDoc6ukFY/aOt+glTPVLPiAjlw+aZ7t6jag=; b=Mzd1Dnt01id6JSl9OC8L 1OkV05DtkWC0wAxAfn1qv9Ij1x0vUho6ElT7txsiMY+1sXWp7dtDMHFMYYjiPf3GYhA6eMpG9vU8B WKFwtrzxrCjiqGQikwnlcHmz4O8OtM4G/HT1waHlX+1bd7whrAgu1mFXON5D8BnrEpsgzK1SUeMqS UOIdnW3cV3omyudM1Pk4IkV82zW71+Uu1uqttyfDdq6cPkMN4uB5/OTAwFx69NRIpnYfV+Z22FkJJ D4tVxeZgQxu15256eb0Jm/ZXEit9qRnfWipjf/2VSCAnH8gH3Ghf8wb5A4cKX6a75tQObreMMrH9a htYek2irZkzUlQ==; In-Reply-To: (message from Gerd =?UTF-8?Q?M=C3=B6llmann?= on Sat, 04 Jan 2025 19:35:04 +0100) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:298454 Archived-At: > From: Gerd Möllmann > Cc: pipcet@protonmail.com, 75322@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 19:35:04 +0100 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > We are still arguing whether GC moves Lisp strings and what exactly > > does that mean. We still don't understand well enough what, if > > anything, are the problems with SAFE_ALLOCA and its ilk. > > I can't believe you say that. We talked about why xmalloc'd memory > has to be a root if it contains references. SAFE_NALLOCA uses xnmalloc. > Safe_ALLOCA_LISP does things differently. Sorry, I don't have a clear idea what that means. When can we use SAFE_NALLOCA and friends? when can we or must we use SAFE_ALLOCA_LISP? What are the considerations? etc. etc. I believe you that you have a clear idea, but we need all of us have a clear idea, and we should probably write that up somewhere once we do. > > We just established that ENCODE_FILE and ENCODE_SYSTEM can trigger GC, > > and didn't yet review the affected code. And there are many more > > places and calls to consider (e.g., do you know that redisplay could > > trigger GC when it calls character composition?). > > > > If we don't consider this stuff, if we just "do the xstrdup thing and > > forget about it", how can we continue cleaning up the igc branch and > > making its code more stable and reliable? It doesn't sound wise to > > me. > > I'll bow out of this discussion, sorry. This time for real :-). I'm sorry to hear that, because I think it's important to have you on board in this discussion.