From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: scame Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: How should this profiler report interpreted? Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2021 13:59:36 +0000 Message-ID: Reply-To: scame Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="33271"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: "help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org" Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 26 15:00:19 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-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 1lPn0c-0008X0-Ql for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 15:00:18 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51374 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lPn0b-0006mD-Eh for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 10:00:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48856) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lPn04-0006m5-8w for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 09:59:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-40132.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.132]:41592) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lPn01-0002da-I6 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Mar 2021 09:59:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail; t=1616767178; bh=jrw/GbzZqqnwe2BtRSXPR7PD6ee3iozizoAiStV8tcY=; h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:From; b=mcSrIc+u8PjiD6+lnYU7xrzl2oJFpg/jPAQSILXqVKFXwwYid4pTBfieCN2pPfmJh 8N0Kboigjq2+LOLC6pjeGI8bJttEtYFf/kv6fpPJRG5EIiF1IrOZH/VGhtmQxwUDEx BTe+MAF89BmHvhLYzYA6nsnlqIoRLQJltOV+gPRM= Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.132; envelope-from=laszlomail@protonmail.com; helo=mail-40132.protonmail.ch X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:128628 Archived-At: I have a function which I use to process some files and it works slowly with bigger files. I tried to profile it and I got this output. Only the relevant part is shown: - save-excursion 9817 99% - insert 2 0% - jit-lock-after-change 1 0% - run-hook-with-args 1 0% font-lock-extend-jit-lock-region-after-change 1 0% Does this mean the save-excursion call itself consumes 99% of the CPU?