Yes, it is possible in Linux.
Yes, it is possible in Linux.
I'm adding quite a few items to my i3bar and I'm not happy about the CPU activity they're reporting. But if my display brightness only refreshes every 30 seconds after I change it, it would look pretty average. Would it be better to instead check a file that refreshes at regular intervals, rather than constantly polling something like CPU or memory stats? That way, when a program runs or a script executes, it would ask the monitor in my i3bar for updates. This approach wouldn't work with all monitoring tools—those that need real-time data like CPU or RAM—since they require constant checks. But for things like time, brightness, battery, internet status, volume, everything should update infrequently enough to feel natural. Instead of keeping a separate process always watching, we could make the source itself adjust after its task, then ask the monitor to refresh. Of course, we won't set up another background service to keep checking, but we can trigger updates right when needed.
The system doesn't require any changes whenever the code or OS updates the battery level. We also send a signal to our daemon to refresh the monitoring. However, it seems very difficult to achieve this. There might be something comparable to the task scheduler in Linux. If such an entry exists that adjusts the battery percentage, we could adapt it for updating our daemon as well.
Cron helps set up automated tasks at designated times or intervals. It doesn’t interact with battery status. You might need to execute a script periodically and let it adjust based on battery changes. Any display widget showing battery percentage will handle this independently, without depending on an external scheduler.
I refer to actions as responses to changes like battery status updates or power connections. It’s likely you’re looking to automate reactions to specific system events. Yes, there are probably programmatic ways to handle this, and you can detect relevant system-level triggers.
It's interesting how much attention you pay to CPU cycles. Everyone thinks about performance, but it's often overlooked. Your questions highlight the trade-offs between speed and efficiency. People sometimes prioritize lower resolutions or settings just to save CPU usage, even if their hardware is powerful. It seems like a common misunderstanding about what matters most in computing.
I own a laptop and experience performance spikes while these tasks run. The second point is I notice my kernel constantly struggling with syscalls each second. That’s not the exact meaning but I believe you get it. Frequent interrupts every second can slightly impact overall speed, particularly when CPU usage is high.
@Eigenvektor Bro, das ist klar! Was passiert – der Akku entlädt sich. Der Prozentsatz sinkt. Der Kernel zeigt im ACPI an. Mein Daemon prüft jede Sekunde und aktualisiert die Zahl auf dem Bildschirm. Ich will genau das – den Akku entladen sehen. Das magische Signal erreicht meinen Idle-Daemon. Er aktualisiert die Prozentzahl.
if you are worry about battery life, let me tell you.... 99% battery longevity comes from lowering screen brightness, reducing cpu frequency(aka lowering performance) and closing down power hungry applications like games/constant web browsing. this is what your phone's battery savings mode does as matter of fact. probably less than 1% comes from everything you are trying to do above. leaving your computer powered on and never turning it off also drains battery and costs cpu cycle do you know? have you ever consider just turning your computer off/putting it to sleep when idling? lastly, i dont know how your kernel suffocates. they are 1s and 0s and exist as some data on a hardrive which manifests physically in the real world as just some magnetic state if you use magnetic drive or as some resistors that allow or stops eletricity if you are talking about ssd. so your kernel does absolutely zero work since it is literally just data represented by magnets and transistors arrange in certain way to represent 1s and 0s in the real physical universe. rather your cpu does any "actual work" since it reads those instructions and executes them and this "work" manifests itself in the real physical universe as just how much and how often eletricity runs through its semiconductor circuits. For all intents and purposes, my eletric kettle probably does more joules of work and "suffocates" more than your laptop considering it literally needs more electrons flowing through its wire to boil a liter of water vs the whatever is needed for your laptop to run its kernel and operating system.