From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#24091: 24.5; High CPU usage at startup while hidden Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 13:53:40 -0400 Message-ID: References: <24533f31-9fc2-b38e-aaeb-561616cdf77f@gmail.com> <87shut9pyk.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83lh0lq9n5.fsf@gnu.org> <83oa5fp1zb.fsf@gnu.org> <877fbkw7b1.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83inv1fnf9.fsf@gnu.org> <83zinodghv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1472925258 14548 195.159.176.226 (3 Sep 2016 17:54:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 17:54:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Aiken , =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel , 24091@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Sep 03 19:54:14 2016 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 1bgF8w-0003Jk-LJ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 19:54:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47318 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bgF8u-000652-Cy for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 13:54:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33543) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bgF8o-00064v-KH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 13:54:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bgF8k-0002Im-DY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 13:54:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:51201) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bgF8k-0002Ii-AU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 13:54:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bgF8k-0007qQ-6N for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 13:54:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2016 17:54:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 24091 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: confirmed Original-Received: via spool by 24091-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B24091.147292522830135 (code B ref 24091); Sat, 03 Sep 2016 17:54:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 24091) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Sep 2016 17:53:48 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48913 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bgF8W-0007pz-EX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 13:53:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-oi0-f48.google.com ([209.85.218.48]:35207) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bgF8U-0007pm-Fo for 24091@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 13:53:46 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-oi0-f48.google.com with SMTP id p186so166493355oia.2 for <24091@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 10:53:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8/jnlk4zc6Fv8spJfJEJYz9skBmQV9CgKGdkCZZl3aE=; b=DB2kXGtCMzG63pvcbhol4b3qpXmL7UHIIHhF4R32RVwJgpGbGs2gsK+wYOBWdWbBX/ VngWzfszwVydFldgBTT4cq4CNL43WlzIt6b73Jmj4pGRdNJlrTEB5qn75gLweTNgL2Ac cU7fGcAx5wsdMp8CmnITshygLONVDIXtl7quXy4ia7LA4/uFzpzQ0gJbPbH9hh2bzMJO 764qfJJafMD3sFv3MqiVnB8It4lw7e8IeNtOOTDBWsmwqIXZEofmMb7MTnL65esoOuMa BHR1Y32JNKorDKI0/W5nkHT3gVzA+ocJ5h7g3/cGZX5IDgIIt8CnPWndCUO2Wi+lqpju SiaQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8/jnlk4zc6Fv8spJfJEJYz9skBmQV9CgKGdkCZZl3aE=; b=eP5bB8lMWPaYyGTo6xF04lWq8UReAWTrWqb8hGqMz+4js8ERLnvwd0QB9kkm9M8CoV NleMJOYFrvFLBLn75eo4dDin6A4MoswQVuRusIO6DBDeicAG+EW/hcVy3SN9v0yN3s/0 bDz7C2r+Zv2zZRE0EEcjv4G+6D8WbDj2dTIgXB2/No8j/ckag6GPgTw6rCH03+fXna7X VXjPXj0ZpL9eP48vyALmQkRq6H07whnf7lLM2vr5mJEwVxhSl161GoK9i0/P+XdbIC5A m3gKng+Q0s9DDeIXVbY+K9Nl2WiWLctyylywPjI06xolOW8CV2T6zOLrYjUmorEkM7jV tO6A== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOy8Qt2OAk4D4pveo9oz44Ww8NnaN9itpNVNikLnc6wJYCaqY9UhkkIop0KA5gxxpf+/DXP25088V+XMw== X-Received: by 10.202.186.65 with SMTP id k62mr22661796oif.143.1472925220932; Sat, 03 Sep 2016 10:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.157.7.195 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Sep 2016 10:53:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83zinodghv.fsf@gnu.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: wKOmus6p3osgz7L8e4eAIEWiFOg 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:122896 Archived-At: On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 1:45 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Noam Postavsky >> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 13:29:39 -0400 >> Cc: 24091@debbugs.gnu.org, Aiken , >> Cl=C3=A9ment Pit--Claudel >> >> >> > I'd start by finding out why FRAME_ICONIFIED_P returns false. >> >> >> >> Well, it seems that's because Emacs never receives an UnmapNotify eve= nt. >> >> But that doesn't feel like I'm getting any closer to a solution... >> > >> > What events does Emacs get in that case? >> >> Emacs is getting PropertyNotify, ConfigureNotify, MapNotify, and >> ReparentNotify events. > > Does it work to turn this: > > if (FRAME_ICONIFIED_P (f) && ++tries > 100) > break; > > into this: > > if ((FRAME_ICONIFIED_P (f) || FRAME_VISIBLE_P (f)) && ++tries > = 100) > break; No, which sort of makes sense since the frame isn't actually visible.