From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jun 06 23:21:39 2010 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Jun 2010 03:21:39 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLSuB-0002Uy-8X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:39 -0400 Received: from mx10.gnu.org ([199.232.76.166]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLSu9-0002Ut-RI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:38 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]:33263) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OLSu6-0002JX-By for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:34 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39408 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OLSu5-0006ZH-RY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:33 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OLSu5-0002JR-3u for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:33 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on monty-python X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:36128) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OLSu4-0002JN-TL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:32 -0400 Received: from dann by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLSu4-0005WP-Pb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:32 -0400 To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: bidi data structure inefficiencies From: Dan Nicolaescu X-Debbugs-No-Ack: yes Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:32 -0400 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-Spam-Score: -6.5 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.5 (------) Some bidi data structures are bigger that they need to be, this probably results in additional cache misses. Examples: struct bidi_saved_info could use bitfields for the bidi_type_t members Same for bidi_stack bidi_it could use bitfields for a lot of it's members. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jun 07 09:37:09 2010 Received: (at 6365) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Jun 2010 13:37:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLcVp-000850-AA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:37:09 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLcVn-00084t-Aa for 6365@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:37:07 -0400 Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLcVi-0004qQ-JG; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:37:02 -0400 From: Eli Zaretskii To: Dan Nicolaescu In-reply-to: (message from Dan Nicolaescu on Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:32 -0400) Subject: Re: bug#6365: bidi data structure inefficiencies References: Message-Id: Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:37:02 -0400 X-Spam-Score: -5.2 (-----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 6365 Cc: 6365@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.5 (------) > From: Dan Nicolaescu > Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 23:21:32 -0400 > Cc: > > Some bidi data structures are bigger that they need to be, this > probably results in additional cache misses. > Examples: > > struct bidi_saved_info could use bitfields for the bidi_type_t members > Same for bidi_stack > > bidi_it could use bitfields for a lot of it's members. Thanks for the critical review and suggestions. I started a discussion thread on emacs-devel about this, because I'm not sure fixing this is a straight-forward matter. I will implement whatever conclusions are reached there as part of solving this bug report. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 06 16:52:03 2011 Received: (at 6365) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Oct 2011 20:52:03 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBuvD-0007oc-NK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 16:52:03 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBuvC-0007oW-ER for 6365@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 16:52:02 -0400 Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBuv0-0002i7-SG; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 16:51:50 -0400 From: Glenn Morris To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#6365: bidi data structure inefficiencies References: X-Spook: Agfa infowar Islam Abduganievich Karimov Adriatic Noriega X-Ran: ^m#va@!%|X/Gj*=f@1yo+BK+6yDN"[x;v\RO]h8RVqn,x/*.tr7%4}ax}4.\'y51qQG}D( X-Hue: green X-Attribution: GM Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 16:51:50 -0400 In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:37:02 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 6365 Cc: 6365@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Thanks for the critical review and suggestions. I started a > discussion thread on emacs-devel about this, because I'm not sure > fixing this is a straight-forward matter. I will implement whatever > conclusions are reached there as part of solving this bug report. Did anything happen with this? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 06 17:08:56 2011 Received: (at 6365) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Oct 2011 21:08:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvBY-0000Wh-7p for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:08:56 -0400 Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvBW-0000WV-Ks for 6365@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:08:55 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LSN00M00X34TJ00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 6365@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:04:51 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.91.138]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LSN00M6VX82C2B0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:04:51 +0200 (IST) Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:04:54 +0200 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#6365: bidi data structure inefficiencies In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Glenn Morris Message-id: <83fwj5hlvt.fsf@gnu.org> References: X-Spam-Score: -2.1 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 6365 Cc: 6365@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.1 (--) > From: Glenn Morris > Cc: 6365@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 16:51:50 -0400 > > Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Thanks for the critical review and suggestions. I started a > > discussion thread on emacs-devel about this, because I'm not sure > > fixing this is a straight-forward matter. I will implement whatever > > conclusions are reached there as part of solving this bug report. > > Did anything happen with this? See the discussion that started here: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-06/msg00164.html AFAIU, the conclusion was that there are no evident optimizations, and that only profiling the current code against an alternative can tell which one is better. FWIW, I don't plan working o this any time soon. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 06 17:13:49 2011 Received: (at 6365) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Oct 2011 21:13:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvGH-0000di-Ql for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:13:49 -0400 Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvGG-0000dV-1B for 6365@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:13:48 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LSN00F00XGY7E00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 6365@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:13:18 +0200 (IST) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.124.91.138]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LSN00EXEXM5MOD0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:13:18 +0200 (IST) Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:13:21 +0200 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#6365: bidi data structure inefficiencies In-reply-to: <83fwj5hlvt.fsf@gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: rgm@gnu.org Message-id: <83ehyphlhq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83fwj5hlvt.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.1 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 6365 Cc: 6365@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -2.1 (--) > Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:04:54 +0200 > From: Eli Zaretskii > Cc: 6365@debbugs.gnu.org > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-06/msg00164.html > > AFAIU, the conclusion was that there are no evident optimizations, and > that only profiling the current code against an alternative can tell > which one is better. > > FWIW, I don't plan working o this any time soon. Oh, and I did convert 2 members of `struct bidi_it' from `int's to 1-bit fields. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 06 17:22:53 2011 Received: (at 6365-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Oct 2011 21:22:53 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvP3-0000qb-Ik for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:53 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvP1-0000qT-Rz for 6365-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:52 -0400 Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvOq-0004PY-Fq; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:40 -0400 From: Glenn Morris To: 6365-done@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#6365: bidi data structure inefficiencies References: <83fwj5hlvt.fsf@gnu.org> <83ehyphlhq.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spook: AFSPC data haven Ft. Knox industrial intelligence NASA X-Ran: [dR=MT_{yfVgcOr#HCFIUV5sYTRES4Wu{yy7@e@d6*V~CPHy_g8+k/J&.I]m[zdIj~/\y' X-Hue: red X-Debbugs-No-Ack: yes X-Attribution: GM Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <83ehyphlhq.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:13:21 +0200") Message-ID: <7uy5wx3jdr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 6365-done X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -6.4 (------) Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-06/msg00164.html >> >> AFAIU, the conclusion was that there are no evident optimizations, and >> that only profiling the current code against an alternative can tell >> which one is better. >> >> FWIW, I don't plan working o this any time soon. > > Oh, and I did convert 2 members of `struct bidi_it' from `int's to > 1-bit fields. OK; doesn't seem worth keeping this open as a bug then. From unknown Fri Aug 15 16:24:54 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 11:24:03 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator