New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Bug]: crashReporter.start
blocks main process takes more than 600ms on macOS
#34321
Comments
I've sent https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 to fix the performance problem. Waiting for approvals. |
This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 620 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: electron#34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
My Crashpad CL landed yesterday, so I submitted a backport PR - #34609. With that change, initializing the crashReporter should just take 257 milliseconds on Intel Macs. Will try to submit a follow up CL to reduce that even further if possible. EDIT: Sent another CL to crashpad which reduces the 257 milliseconds duration to 1 millisecond - https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3711503. However, initializing the crashpad would take around 110 milliseconds the first time you run Electron and then that reduces to 10 milliseconds in subsequent runs and all of that time is consumed here - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:third_party/crashpad/crashpad/client/crashpad_client_mac.cc;l=360-361;drc=300938d278c0fe0e1485a5f1731d242eb47ccc27;bpv=0;bpt=0. Will see if I can find the reason behind this. |
This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: electron#34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: electron#34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
fix: performance problem in crashReporter.start() on macOS This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
* fix: performance problem in crashReporter.start() on macOS This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> * Update .patches Co-authored-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Cheng Zhao <zcbenz@gmail.com>
* fix: performance problem in crashReporter.start() on macOS This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> * Update .patches * chore: update patches Co-authored-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Cheng Zhao <zcbenz@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: PatchUp <73610968+patchup[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix: performance problem in crashReporter.start() on macOS This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> * Update .patches * chore: update patches * Update posix_replace_doubleforkandexec_with_forkandspawn.patch * chore: update patches Co-authored-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Cheng Zhao <zcbenz@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: PatchUp <73610968+patchup[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
* fix: performance problem in crashReporter.start() on macOS This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: #34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> * Trigger Build Co-authored-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: John Kleinschmidt <jkleinsc@electronjs.org>
@RaisinTen thanks a ton for this! you said:
Curious if that is something we could get too or whether that change is breaking? |
🙌
Not in the current state of the CL. I do plan to resume my work on it again when I get some time. My next approach for replacing the final |
…n#34609) fix: performance problem in crashReporter.start() on macOS This change reduces the duration of crashReporter.start() on Intel macOS from 622 milliseconds to 257 milliseconds! Backports https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 posix: Replace DoubleForkAndExec() with ForkAndSpawn() The DoubleForkAndExec() function was taking over 622 milliseconds to run on macOS 11 (BigSur) on Intel i5-1038NG7. I did some debugging by adding some custom traces and found that the fork() syscall is the bottleneck here, i.e., the first fork() takes around 359 milliseconds and the nested fork() takes around 263 milliseconds. Replacing the nested fork() and exec() with posix_spawn() reduces the time consumption to 257 milliseconds! See libuv/libuv#3064 to know why fork() is so slow on macOS and why posix_spawn() is a better replacement. Another point to note is that even base::LaunchProcess() from Chromium calls posix_spawnp() on macOS - https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/8f8d82dea0fa8f11f57c74dbb65126f8daba58f7:base/process/launch_mac.cc;l=295-296 Change-Id: I25c6ee9629a1ae5d0c32b361b56a1ce0b4b0fd26 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/crashpad/crashpad/+/3641386 Reviewed-by: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Mark Mentovai <mark@chromium.org> Fixes: electron#34321 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
Preflight Checklist
Electron Version
18.2.4
What operating system are you using?
macOS
Operating System Version
macOS Monterey 12.3.1
What arch are you using?
x64
Last Known Working Electron version
18.2.4
Expected Behavior
Expect
crashReporter.start
to return quickly. It takes only 33ms inElectron@11
with the same code on the same machine.Actual Behavior
It seems that #33072 does not the same question.
crashReporter.start
takes a long time whilespawn
returns quickly, and seriously delay the app startup.Testcase Gist URL
https://gist.github.com/cupools/9336a79b76ef5da2b61105a63c796824
Additional Information
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: