From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Time to merge scratch/correct-warning-pos into master, perhaps? Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2022 18:35:15 +0000 Message-ID: References: <83mtjwzwkb.fsf@gnu.org> <87r198ytog.fsf@gnus.org> <87zgnvyb5y.fsf@gnus.org> <87bl03j10s.fsf@gnus.org> <9D116A4B-622F-4C80-83E6-2CDD7ED9AD25@acm.org> <58bb8030d532070ed420@heytings.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37672"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Mattias =?iso-8859-1?Q?Engdeg=E5rd?= , Lars Ingebrigtsen , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Monnier To: Gregory Heytings Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jan 22 19:52:03 2022 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 1nBLUY-0009eK-S7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 19:52:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50888 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nBLUX-0002PD-B3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:52:01 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:36224) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nBLEd-0000Zs-Md for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:35:36 -0500 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:18827 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nBLEO-0001Ja-Cy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 13:35:34 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 86561 invoked by uid 3782); 22 Jan 2022 18:35:19 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p2e5d54f8.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [46.93.84.248]) (using STARTTLS) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Sat, 22 Jan 2022 19:35:18 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 16978 invoked by uid 1000); 22 Jan 2022 18:35:15 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <58bb8030d532070ed420@heytings.org> X-Submission-Agent: TMDA/1.3.x (Ph3nix) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de Received-SPF: pass client-ip=193.149.48.1; envelope-from=acm@muc.de; helo=mail.muc.de X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:285223 Archived-At: Hello, Gregory. On Sat, Jan 22, 2022 at 17:02:43 +0000, Gregory Heytings wrote: > >> I'd like to see the results from elisp-benchmarks with and without this > >> patch set, please. > > In my experience, the elisp-benchmarks are very much not representative > > of actual elisp usage, and I have done quite some benchmarking for other > > reasons lately. > I don't know what benchmarks would be representative of actual elisp > usage, but on my build machine both make bootstrap and make check are > consistently ~8% slower on correct-warning-pos vs master: > make -j1 bootstrap: 649s vs 596s > make -j4 bootstrap: 257s vs 238s > make -j8 bootstrap: 198s vs 183s > make -j1 check: 178s vs 162s > make -j4 check: 44s vs 40s > make -j8 check: 26s vs 24s This is true, and expected. However the bootstrap is still faster than it was this time last week, due to commit 10083e788f7349fa363d100687dc3d94bea88f57 on Thursday. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).