[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 64 bit official Windows builds
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: 64 bit official Windows builds |
Date: |
Thu, 11 Feb 2016 22:50:39 +0200 |
> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 08:58:45 -0500
>
> >> Could I ask, what is the benefit of 64 bits compared to 32 bits for
> >> windows ?
> > It will run roughly twice faster.
> [...]
> > slower, because running a 32-bit executable on a 64-bit Windows
> > requires expensive thunking for every call to any Windows API,
>
> Holy crap? Really? It's hard to believe that 64-bit Windows's
> emulation of the 32-bit API is so inefficient that it causes a "rough
> slowdown" by a factor 2 in an application like Emacs.
>
> Do you see such a factor-of-2 difference when doing "rm lisp/**/*.elc;
> make"? Or in which kind of circumstance have you seen such a slowdown?
I measured that by running GNU Find compiled from the same sources on
a large and deep directory tree on the same Windows 7 box.
That thunking is the culprit is my theory, not a fact; however, I
cannot find any other explanation. If someone does, I'm all ears.
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, moocow062, 2016/02/08
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/02/08
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Óscar Fuentes, 2016/02/08
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Stefan Monnier, 2016/02/11
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Óscar Fuentes, 2016/02/11
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/02/12
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Óscar Fuentes, 2016/02/12
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/02/12
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Óscar Fuentes, 2016/02/12
- Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/02/12
Re: 64 bit official Windows builds, djc, 2016/02/08