Re: [dev] Culling all the way down

From: Tobias Bengfort <>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 07:42:21 +0200


On 07/09/2020 09.13, Alexander Krotov wrote:
> Maybe a better solution is to send XOFF (see
>, but I am also
> not sure how other programs react to it. They will probably block
> waiting for the write(2) syscall to return instead of continuing to
> do work in the background.

Trying this manually had exactly the desired outcome: CPU usage dropped
to 0. Nice!

On 06/09/2020 09.48, Mattias Andrée wrote:
> You would just be adding unneeded work and complexity for next to no
> gain.

Even if there is little gain it might still make sense if the solution
is simple. This feels like it could be simple, but I am not sure.

Concrete steps:

- dwm sets _NET_WM_STATE_HIDDEN on windows that are currently not displayed
- st sends XON/XOFF when _NET_WM_STATE_HIDDEN is set

Do you think this would be reasonable or are there potential issues I am

Received on Tue Sep 08 2020 - 07:42:21 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Sep 08 2020 - 07:48:07 CEST