| ▲ | matvore 2 days ago | |
My point is that I understand the users' complaint and request for a revert, not that I can't address this for my own machines. The proper solution for non-technical people is to ask the expert to fix it, which may include undoing the change if they were never interested in the process finishing faster anyway.I did solve this problem once upon a time by running the process in a cgroup with limited CPU, though I later rewrote my dwm config and lost the command, without caring enough to maintain the fix. | ||
| ▲ | AlotOfReading 2 days ago | parent [-] | |
This isn't something the developer has any meaningful control over. Scheduling policy is the responsibility of the host system, running faster usually consumes less power, and the developer has no way to know when an operation will kick in the undesirable fans because it depends on what else the system is running. The best they can do is a checkbox that runs the old code or adding sleep calls instead | ||