Process Lasso 6.0.2.69b can't restore original power plan after Energy Saver

[hanemach_gt]

Process Lasso's Energy Saver acts correctly and sets Power Saver power plan, but is unable to restore the previous plan, whatever it was.

[hanemach_gt]

I investigated it myself: the preset non-idle power plan for me was Power Saver, exactly the same as the power plan to be switched after some time of inactivity. I don't know how Process Lasso gets default non-idle power plan, my guess is that I updated Process Lasso when power plan had somehow been Power Saver at the moment of Process Lasso termination before auto-update.

Edit: now I am sure about my guess. I manually set Power Saver and opened up the Energy Saver Configuration Dialog to see - Power Saver was in the non-idle power plan field. That means, I must have had Power Saver power plan active during the automatic update of Process Lasso.

[BenYeeHua]

Yes, I also facing this issue one time.
It switch to High Performance for game process, and I update PL, then it don't change back after the game process is end.

[Jeremy Collake]

Thank you for the report.

The non-idle power plan is simply the current power profile, except in recent versions where the user can choose to set a non-idle power profile and have it persist.

I will check through everything and make sure all changes to the power profiles are logged - perhaps including a change not made by Process Lasso (e.g. the user manually changing the power profile). This will allow better tracking of changes.

@BenYeeHua: That is a separate complaint, I will investigate it. There are safety mechanisms to prevent a 'loss' in the proper power profile in the case of an abnormal termination of the governor. Whether or not things got confused, or this recovery mechanism failed to work in this case, I must investigate further. Are you using Energy Saver as well, or just the gaming mode?

[BenYeeHua]

@BenYeeHua: That is a separate complaint, I will investigate it. There are safety mechanisms to prevent a 'loss' in the proper power profile in the case of an abnormal termination of the governor. Whether or not things got confused, or this recovery mechanism failed to work in this case, I must investigate further. Are you using Energy Saver as well, or just the gaming mode?

Just gaming mode+switch to "High Performance"Power Plan, and update PL.
----
I just testing with MPC-HC, yes, PL don't remember which Power Plan it should restore after update.
Just like a normal close of PL, and reopen it, PL think it is "High Performance", and set MPC-HC again as "High Performance".
This will make some issues when the update dialog don't come out anymore, and many people start using silent update.

And I found another small bug.
1.Run MPC-HC.
2.Set the Default Power Plan as High Performance.
3.PL change to High Performance after you set it.
4.Set the Default Power Plan as None.
5.PL don't do anything(It should restore back to "Balance"), until you end the process that you set.

PS:When testing the update, I found the updater download speed has become slower, maybe you should check for it(server).

[Jeremy Collake]

I will do some testing and see what I can figure out. I should be able to reproduce what you see.

It can be a bit hard to decide what the proper course of action should be in some cases. In the steps you mention of the second bug, for instance, it is behaving as designed. I suppose it should switch back to Balanced, I suppose, though it is somewhat debatable. Especially when you allow for user-induced power profile changes, or external changes to the power profile, it gets really convoluted. I generally try to take the most conservative approach.

Another example is how to properly handle multiple applications running with 'default power profiles' (application power profiles) that may conflict with each other. Obviously, there can't be two power profiles active at once.

[BenYeeHua]

Another example is how to properly handle multiple applications running with 'default power profiles' (application power profiles) that may conflict with each other. Obviously, there can't be two power profiles active at once.

Jump out a window and Ask?

[Jeremy Collake]

Jump out a window and Ask?

If it was timed with a default (something already coded), then perhaps ... The largest issue is that the product isn't designed that way. The core engine is not supposed to interact with the user, and is often running in a context where it can't easily interact with the user (e.g. as a service).

Users would also then want the setting to be remembered, so that if app X and Y are running, always do this or that. It would become a clusterf-ck real fast.

[BenYeeHua]

So,
1.The software that run after will become the active power plan.
Or
2.Choose the Power Plan that is based on "High Performance"
And fall back to 1. if there are 2 Power Plan that is based on the same.
3.Let the user set in the setting, which Power Plan will be chosen when this happen.

I think 3 is better.