From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Zack Stackson Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#15390: 24.3; scrolling in emacs,w32 uses 100% cpu Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 22:53:36 -0500 Message-ID: References: <838uyxqndb.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1379562854 22724 80.91.229.3 (19 Sep 2013 03:54:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 03:54:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 15390@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 19 05:54:17 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VMVJn-0005FH-3C for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 05:54:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49542 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VMVJm-0005gS-NV for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:54:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48832) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VMVJf-0005gK-L4 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:54:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VMVJa-0001P9-RZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:54:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:39696) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VMVJa-0001P4-Np for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:54:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VMVJa-0001eg-9x for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:54:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Zack Stackson Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 03:54:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 15390 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 15390-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B15390.13795628256335 (code B ref 15390); Thu, 19 Sep 2013 03:54:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 15390) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Sep 2013 03:53:45 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47989 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VMVJJ-0001e6-4z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:53:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-bk0-f52.google.com ([209.85.214.52]:36663) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VMVJG-0001ds-Ex for 15390@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 23:53:43 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-bk0-f52.google.com with SMTP id e11so3105054bkh.25 for <15390@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:53:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=pVPVyNnsc/YoYWNu68Hf8fuSEc9kyNy1lEoMGGZ+8tg=; b=bvGtPWVrFiofL14Cg43PkH8Zd1EfHSMxeVpQQXBFXfpmy6XeLQoSn5T9Gk/d+7FsNI DC1weMpe7E2gciVKrk9PXfctE/+QGxjrc10L+o7MpvmkqLDdBNK0P3hRTZfQgg3SgmVT QixWrVY612go2TcCvPq+BjLa4Dh1HYaC6y0PuxYA8OT+47oGYX/z2RTt4fjcx7FK0xI5 SGdlap0phSgCQLw36D/ASgwp1iI3oqyJUOMFl0yB8ymCQW06M7Nqq1rVxwYDGnfJqs4O efMWujvzCf9jXhG63nU1R4FVhgL9qhgiQilwonnZ4TPhl80c97a8SJuh88qjJIatoWCd Vhfg== X-Received: by 10.205.15.72 with SMTP id pt8mr36889045bkb.17.1379562816407; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:53:36 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.204.236.4 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:53:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <838uyxqndb.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:78551 Archived-At: On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Mine is 1920x1080 (but I don't think the size matters here, unless you > are running with the frame maximized, which you didn't say). I am running with frame height maximized (1440px), performance with height set to 720px is not nearly as bad. > > .emacs config: > > (setq scroll-step 1) > > Is that the only thing in your .emacs? I started "emacs -Q", then set > scroll-step to 1 manually -- do you see the same performance problem > when you do that? If not, there's something else in your .emacs that > makes the difference. I tested with emacs -Q and setting scroll-step to 1 manually, it is the same. Also tested with emacs -Q and setting font to small size, page up slowness is the same. > Emacs 24's display performance is sensitive to the paragraph length as > well. A paragraph start and end are defined for this purpose as empty > lines. Is it possible that the text files you used didn't have any > empty lines at all? If so, can you try files that do have empty > lines? Also try setting bidi-paragraph-direction to left-to-right > (it's a per-buffer setting, so use setq-default to do that in all > buffers). They did not have any empty lines, adding empty lines made it much faster. Tried (setq bidi-paragraph-direction 'left-to-right) and (setq-default bidi-paragraph-direction 'left-to-right), but that did not make it faster. > > Result with emacs-24.3 with smaller font (6x10 from X11): scrolls one page, > > then stops rendering anything (second to last page stays on the screen), > > uses 100% cpu until top of buffer is reached, then starts rendering again. > > Result with emacs-22.3 with smaller font (6x10 from X11): scrolling is > > smooth, renders all pages, 0-50% cpu usage. > > Couldn't try this one, since you didn't say which font you used, > exactly, and how/from where to get it installed on Windows. Setting font to Consolas size 68 gives similar results to the 6x10 font. (I don't remember which program I used to convert the 6x10 X11 font to windows .fnt) > Yes, Emacs 24's display is slower than that of Emacs 23, because the > former supports bidirectional scripts. So it's not a surprise that > you see some performance degradation. However, that degradation > should be apparent only in some rare use cases. So the question is, > what is special in your case? Emacs 23 is also slow, not as slow as 24, but not much different. Emacs 22 is very fast, so that's the version I have been using. Do bitmap raster fonts take more work than other fonts, maybe that's part of it? The font is 3kb, could I attach it? Page up is also slow when editing files with syntax highlighting (replace.el for example). > Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 09:41:52 +0300 > From: Eli Zaretskii > In addition, the characters that begin a paragraph might be of > importance. You say "text file", so I presume that is human-readable > text, but it could also be a file with many digits and punctuation > characters -- these make redisplay work harder. Yes, there are many numbers and punctuation, just tested with the following repeated: AA3036B2-CCCC DD3036E1-FFF Test text Test text Test text Test text Test But it also happens on syntax highlighted files when using a small font.