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: profiler Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 09:37:12 +0300 Message-ID: <86h6dljxev.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87v823xvq1.fsf@localhost> <86cyobmmhc.fsf@gnu.org> <87r0crxung.fsf@localhost> <87le2zxsqx.fsf@localhost> <8634p6n7jd.fsf@gnu.org> <87tthm3gq2.fsf@gmail.com> <87sex6ags5.fsf@localhost> <87msne3flr.fsf@gmail.com> <87frt63dvt.fsf@gmail.com> <86o77ulgk8.fsf@gnu.org> <868qyyl73z.fsf@gnu.org> <87v822uvjt.fsf@localhost> <877ceinn89.fsf@localhost> <874j9mnlre.fsf@localhost> <87a5je3vz1.fsf@localhost> 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="15102"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: gerd.moellmann@gmail.com, eller.helmut@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ihor Radchenko Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 22 08:38:15 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 1sKuO7-0003iN-Bn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 08:38:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sKuNI-0003zs-UN; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 02:37:24 -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 1sKuNG-0003yv-Bf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 02:37:22 -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 1sKuNA-0001EF-8L; Sat, 22 Jun 2024 02:37:21 -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=T9Zr5BEOlykHO6zcDrmw8zYPi7iTG/x3HEZf/eEKTIY=; b=gmdf/scmT43R3fMqwtC8 irydN9V0gYgSXYQd3Zs3b6obRd8ENsHACEkBv1Q5NBv8PDnRHW5vO4hMI9uCsj3niAfS6w0L1md3t y6Mk5RaywkzjQNUPIq4a1FU3l4IYnMOK+O2BfxvxQ7OI5NbUIwLGJCNapOLfBIFvjUyPBiLMLS3nD jgZRccOm7SJR/l/Rv1KTAnZgRXwYejXxb3dd+EzeoGntVexFRnTSBVQqTEmUHQmkoDHeqZYGqBCVH dzh2ftxoz6TFpMwtIRTH2/3pMGzql1A1svxE9wyHvRtUf5HCEsApZBBHWDNdKtLb61YGOAEctIQcg RDja/ZQd81EOzQ==; In-Reply-To: <87a5je3vz1.fsf@localhost> (message from Ihor Radchenko on Fri, 21 Jun 2024 20:02:42 +0000) 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:320456 Archived-At: > From: Ihor Radchenko > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , eller.helmut@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 20:02:42 +0000 > > Gerd Möllmann writes: > > > Ihor Radchenko writes: > > > >> Now, the question is whether the profiler output wrt "Automatic GC" on > >> scratch/igc branch represent the moments when Emacs is being properly > >> frozen. > > > > Simply said no. > > Then, we should probably not record the times when MPS is active as > "Automatic GC" in the profiler. Maybe simply skip these samples for the > time being (with a FIXME in the code)? That would be more accurate. I don't think I agree. We might rename "Automatic GC" to something more accurate, but skipping that will cause the percentage to be skewed. By and large, this is just about the interpretation of that percentage, nothing else. In any case, you are worrying about these minor issues too early. We are nowhere near a point where they matter. For now, we need to make sure the basic features of Emacs work reliably without crashing; the accuracy of their results comes much later. Let's not put the proverbial wagon before the horse and waste time discussing issues which are for now largely theoretical. > > MPS telemetry could perhaps be used, not sure, and it would of course > > need someone to do it :-). > > We will eventually need some kind of telemetry to compare traditional GC > vs. MPS. Just start Emacs, visit xdisp.c, and scroll through it by leaning on C-v, and you will immediately see how much faster this GC is. (You can also run 'top' or something similar simultaneously to see how the memory footprint grows and then goes down, while you scroll.) So let's please not worry about what the profiler says about GC, because the answer to your question is abundantly clear without that already.