<p dir="ltr">I don't think it is incomplete freeing of patch resources based on what I saw so far. Could it be the watchdog's ping, isn't each of these tied to a specific timestamp?</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jun 19, 2013 3:50 AM, "Roman Haefeli" <<a href="mailto:reduzent@gmail.com">reduzent@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 22:58 +0200, András Murányi wrote:<br>
> Hi List,<br>
><br>
><br>
> I've got used to putting my PC to sleep (aka hibernation) often<br>
> lately. Now there is this behaviour of Pd that when you leave a patch<br>
> open and put the computer to sleep, once it wakes up Pd will try to do<br>
> everything it missed while the computer was sleeping, so the CPU goes<br>
> 100% for quite a while. I suppose this is by design.<br>
><br>
> What I've just noticed using l2ork is that I had closed my patch<br>
> before hibernating (in order to avoid the CPU boost when waking up),<br>
> put the computer to sleep for a few hours, and when i woke it up,<br>
> surprisingly the 100% CPU boost still happened - with only the main<br>
> window and console open.<br>
><br>
> This makes me think some things are not destroyed properly when a<br>
> patch is closed.<br>
><br>
> Any thoughts appreciated...<br>
<br>
Does it help to toggle DSP off and on, when Pd is in this post-suspend<br>
mode? I had the impression it did, but I wasn't sure if it was just a<br>
coincident, that CPU usage stopped at the same moment.<br>
<br>
Roman<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
<a href="mailto:Pd-list@iem.at">Pd-list@iem.at</a> mailing list<br>
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> <a href="http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list" target="_blank">http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list</a><br>
</blockquote></div>