From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, stable-2.0, updated. v2.0.1-33-ga2a6c0e Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 01:30:01 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87tyd6gyc5.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1304811021 26756 80.91.229.12 (7 May 2011 23:30:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 23:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 08 01:30:15 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QIqww-0002Ir-KW for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 08 May 2011 01:30:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34764 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QIqwv-0003kr-Bf for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 07 May 2011 19:30:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:43531) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QIqwr-0003ki-Lw for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2011 19:30:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QIqwq-0003KJ-LV for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 07 May 2011 19:30:09 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:49744 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QIqwq-0003Jh-Ij; Sat, 07 May 2011 19:30:08 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EA0D5307; Sat, 7 May 2011 19:32:11 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=aQFFtGt/6Ayl If6KdwEkgqbmN4E=; b=C8PNuWg+Dt4kZZvFIOk3rfY6Qd1Lt8KRm8OdZRGOrz4t rfUtrk2MYbrDYPKSZiMn3b+BqHsQIii6YslvPtiLqi67tquRU/TotjmoemM6Ypsb hZvNbSorbfWryi3b7siZGfkCS/1hOcllkoq4IdnQ0S7uqPHBJjNj2KjZnx6688s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=YWT6pQ Hcj5LZs6t4f5Xn0+PKS6d+KwqxcjcbbS9sFQnAUxkDXpid+5XDC0Y6ewP6NzJx7S X3hNl4E2V3FhyWxCzduQc+739soyS5Da5/hqd/A5JWBhvagZJ4aT50kxS5Ag3DZa TE/clcsL2bhI9xNgUTvWr59vLqbtm/cglmssE= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1DC5306; Sat, 7 May 2011 19:32:10 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [90.164.198.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AFE2E5304; Sat, 7 May 2011 19:32:08 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87tyd6gyc5.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s=22'?= =?utf-8?Q?s?= message of "Sat, 07 May 2011 20:27:54 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3ABA0D82-7902-11E0-9CA3-90BEB0B5FC3A-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 64.74.157.62 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:12455 Archived-At: On Sat 07 May 2011 20:27, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: >> * libguile/vm-engine.c (vm_engine): Cache the scm_i_thread* instead = of >> the dynstate, so we can use the thread for ticks. > > What effect does it have on performance? Registers are scarce on x86... I did this because there were several million __tls_getaddr calls when compiling psyntax.scm, which presumably are more expensive than either a cached memory ref or a register. In any case it's not more local vars than before... But that's not your question. Answer: I'm pretty sure it's an improvement, but it would be good to see numbers :) Andy --=20 http://wingolog.org/