Database Info

[Q] Kernel source compiling for Xoom.

Hi I looked for sometime for answers but could not find anything relevant.
Looking to get the ftdi VCP drivers to install on Xoom. Which means I either have to compile a kernel or add them as a module. I can not for the life of me find the correct source tree.
I downloaded kernel 2.6.36.3 from google which matches my kernel version.
My kernel version on the tablet is 2.6.36.3-gb899258 .
When I cross compile the module and try to do an insmod its complaining about the magic version is different which leads me to believe that I have the wrong kernel.
Where can I get the right stock kernel?
If i can not find it there is another option to download the config.gz from the device and recompile another version of the kernel with native support for the ftdi drivers.. How do i just install just the kernel on the device? Is it a uImage bzImage and how do I just flash that?
cd
Thanks

edit:
scrap that ...
sorry, not really helpful in your case

I'm assuming you got your source from here? This is the link from the Android website:
git clone https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/tegra.git
If you decide to go the route of compiling another kernel source, the easiest way (and a good way to keep snapshots of various configs) would be to use Koush's AnyKernel to flash the kernel. I don't know anything about what you're trying to do but I hope that helps some.

Yep the code comes from there.....
I finally got it to work , I downloaded the stock kernel from google then when I make the modules I had to modify the Makefile to get it to match the kernel versions.
It seems to work for now...
Thanks for your help

Got kexec-mod, kexec-tools working, atags in progress - Should Also Work With DroidX

I realize people gave up slightly on the whole kexec thing over radio worries, but I now have the module compiling and inserting without error into the Droid2/DroidX gingerbread kernel. Next comes cross compiling the kexec-tools for userspace, to allow us to attempt inserting a different kernel.
To build, you'll need a compiled DroidX kernel from source, as well as the android NDK.
To build, make sure you have downloaded the DroidX GB kernel source and compiled it. There are guides everywhere on how to build Android kernels. Just make sure you use the proper cross compiler.
http://sourceforge.n....l.tgz/download
When you build, make sure to use
Code:
make mapphone_defconfig
Once the kernel is built, clone my repo and edit envsetup.sh to reflect the correct paths to your kernel source directory and the android NDK.
https://github.com/i...kexec-mod-d2-dx
Then, source it:
Code:
source envsetup.sh
Then, just run
Code:
make
and cross your fingers. You should then have a fresh kexec_load.ko file!
To see if it loads, you'll need to copy it to your sdcard, and then on the phone, using a console, do the following:
Code:
su (click allow)
insmod /sdcard/path/to/kexec_load.ko
If you don't get any errors, it inserted! Now, of course, to actually use it, we'd need the kexec-tools built, which I haven't gotten ready yet...but they're coming! To remove the module (no reason to leave it in memory for now):
Code:
rmmod kexec_load
Happy hacking, and help is always appreciated!

This looks great! If you need any help just ask

Thanks! I probably could actually use some. I'm looking at eternity project's git repos now, and am trying to figure out how they managed to get atags working, with the whole procfs thing...still scratching my head there.
I'm looking at eternity project's git repos now, and am trying to figure out how they managed to get atags working, with the whole procfs thing...still scratching my head there, though I do have an atags module working, except it doesn't do anything without atags in the procfs (http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2011-January/004795.html).
kexec-tools:
https://github.com/i...xec-tools-dx-d2
To build, see the README.
Then, copy the binaries from /build/sbin/* to your device, and the move them to the /system/bin directory, and chmod them 770 to make them executable.
mod-atags:
https://github.com/i...mod-atags-d2-dx
Now, if I/we can just get atags and procfs stuff taken care of, we'll be able to go to the next step. I already have atags compiling as a module, but it won't stay inserted because we have no atags in the procfs. Note I can't just trace through code like this and know what everything is doing, but I know enough to hack at it and be dangerous

I know this is kind of off topic, but would this help us people with Motorola Atrix 2? Does it use the same radio?

calebcoverdale said:
I know this is kind of off topic, but would this help us people with Motorola Atrix 2? Does it use the same radio?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No idea. I haven't even gotten the kernel to change yet, so I haven't gotten to mess with radio yet. The method itself should/would work though, but radio will require reverse engineering...perhaps find a similar phone with an open bootloader and disassemble and attempt to clone it's modules.

The latest change I made may or may not work, it was an attempt to remove atags from the kexec module based on an old patch I found, which added the functionality. This at leaset made kexec -l zImage work, but when I run kexec -e, the kexec binary complains about atags not being there...hrmmmph.
I may have to revert it (and will if we can get atags somehow) ...but if we can get the kexec bin to ignore /proc/atags or just find a way to rip them out of the running kernel, we'll be in business.
The commit: https://github.com/ilikenwf/kexec-mod-d2-dx/commit/12dffe0ea286be0fe9ab0303a5a35ed92be4ee2c
I'm also looking into 2ndboot.

I like where this is going! Keep working!
Sent from my DROID2 using xda premium

Okies, so, I emailed aliasxerog (original kexec-mod writer), and I hope he'll get back to me. Even though his twitter says he's a "former android developer," maybe he'll be willing to give me some hints so I can pick up where he left off.
I also got the froyo version of the module building properly based on his module, yet again, (all after SBF'ing my phone back down to motoblur froyo - yech!) but neither currently work... (note there's a gingerbread and a froyo branch on my repo): https://github.com/i...kexec-mod-d2-dx
The froyo one throws the following error, which stops me dead in the water:
Code:
Could not find a free area of memory of 3007dc bytes...
The gingerbread one loads the kernel into memory but won't execute it due to our not having atags.

We've moved our git repos to an organization for easier collaboration:
https://github.com/organizations/D2-DX-Customboot

links are imcomplete.
use URL lable pls.

Cross compiler version ?
hello,
Sorry but I am not able to use the sourceforge link that you provided to download kernel source .. Also please share what cross compiler version is to be used....
Thanks in advance.

Development Questions

I've been waiting for agrabren to drop his cm code for several months now. Guess that kid really did swallow him whole. Well, I got tired of waiting and decided to see if I could get cm to build myself. Heh, not so much. I can't even get cwm to build and boot correctly. So, I'm here to see if someone can point out what I'm doing wrong.
Here's what I did to build. Pulled CM 11.0 and set up the build directories. Copied device/nvidia and vendor/nvidia from the most recent shield tree. Copied the kernel from the shield tree into device/nvidia/roth and modified the configs to build from there. I modified some of the configs and made cm.mk based off the tf701t port which also uses a tegra 4. A lunch and a couple makes later, I got a recovery.img, but it's too big. 8.2MB won't fit in a 8 MB partition. The kernel came out at 5.9 MB and the ramdisk-recovery.img is 2.3 MB. In an official shield build, the ramdisk-recovery.img is 777KB. I know cwm has a lot more in it, but I seem to be missing something to shave 200KB off it. BoardConfig.mk has the recovery partition size set to 8MB, but that doesn't seem to make a difference. Is there something somewhere that can be used to strip less useful stuff out the recovery image?
Thanks for any help,
Steel01

Steel01 said:
I've been waiting for agrabren to drop his cm code for several months now. Guess that kid really did swallow him whole. Well, I got tired of waiting and decided to see if I could get cm to build myself. Heh, not so much. I can't even get cwm to build and boot correctly. So, I'm here to see if someone can point out what I'm doing wrong.
Here's what I did to build. Pulled CM 11.0 and set up the build directories. Copied device/nvidia and vendor/nvidia from the most recent shield tree. Copied the kernel from the shield tree into device/nvidia/roth and modified the configs to build from there. I modified some of the configs and made cm.mk based off the tf701t port which also uses a tegra 4. A lunch and a couple makes later, I got a recovery.img, but it's too big. 8.2MB won't fit in a 8 MB partition. The kernel came out at 5.9 MB and the ramdisk-recovery.img is 2.3 MB. In an official shield build, the ramdisk-recovery.img is 777KB. I know cwm has a lot more in it, but I seem to be missing something to shave 200KB off it. BoardConfig.mk has the recovery partition size set to 8MB, but that doesn't seem to make a difference. Is there something somewhere that can be used to strip less useful stuff out the recovery image?
Thanks for any help,
Steel01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was previously working on cm but failed as I don't have the device. I suggest building the aosp 4.3 for the shield then work your way up to cm
http://nv-tegra.nvidia.com/gitweb/?...;a=blob_plain;f=README;hb=rel-roth-r3-partner
My idea was to see what's needed and not needed as a lot won't be used in cm.

Unjustified Dev said:
I was previously working on cm but failed as I don't have the device. I suggest building the aosp 4.3 for the shield then work your way up to cm
http://nv-tegra.nvidia.com/gitweb/?...;a=blob_plain;f=README;hb=rel-roth-r3-partner
My idea was to see what's needed and not needed as a lot won't be used in cm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've got the device and some development knowledge, but a complete lack of android build system knowledge.
I've got the nvidia 4.3 recovery to build (on a VM since it's less tolerant of JDKs than cm), the rest should compile easily enough. So if I was to build up from there, what kind of process would I be looking at? I would presume start with replacing the recovery with cwm. If so, where am I looking to replace stuff at?
Do you still have any of the work you had started?
Steel01

Steel01 said:
I've got the device and some development knowledge, but a complete lack of android build system knowledge.
I've got the nvidia 4.3 recovery to build (on a VM since it's less tolerant of JDKs than cm), the rest should compile easily enough. So if I was to build up from there, what kind of process would I be looking at? I would presume start with replacing the recovery with cwm. If so, where am I looking to replace stuff at?
Do you still have any of the work you had started?
Steel01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, getting the recovery booting is the first thing.I can't really help right now but in a few hours or so I will pm you here's the github i'm going to be working at (removed) as you see there's not really anything there. I'm working on making the device tree work in a cm tree. It will probably be a while before my aosp build finishes. If you wish to chat on hangouts pm your email address .

Unjustified Dev said:
Yes, getting the recovery booting is the first thing.I can't really help right now but in a few hours or so I will pm you here's the github i'm going to be working at https://github.com/CM-Shield as you see there's not really anything there. I'm working on making the device tree work in a cm tree. It will probably be a while before my aosp build finishes. If you wish to chat on hangouts pm your email address .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, pm sent. Guess I'll fire off a full aosp build so we'll have the same trees available at that time.
Steel01
Edit: Today's just not my day. None of my builds from nvidia's aosp 4.3 r3 tree boot. A normal boot hangs at the shield logo. The recovery gives me the red triangle (not terribly surprised since nvidia's official gives me that too, only agrabren's cwm recovery works for me). I didn't think too much of it when I built off of openjdk 1.6, but now that I pulled sun's 1.6-41 and it still doesn't boot, I'm a bit miffed. Shouldn't be a reason why I can't build off CentOS. Maybe I'll load up a Debian or Mint VM and try building off that. I really don't want to touch Ubuntu which all the android docs are written for...

Okay, so I don't feel so bad anymore. The kernel boots fine. But the system image generated from the official shield tree doesn't. It starts the boot animation and hangs. But I have adb and complete shell access. Wipes don't help. Which if I was to guess means I have a java problem on the build VM. The C only kernel is fine, but nothing else works right. Big surprise there. That or something like the graphics blob didn't get packaged in. I'll play with it some more and might be able to build a working system by the time Unjustified Dev pushes some code up...
Steel01
Edit: And according to a logcat, I'm missing some so's. Don't know if I missed a build failure or if the official tree is broken.

Steel01 said:
Okay, so I don't feel so bad anymore. The kernel boots fine. But the system image generated from the official shield tree doesn't. It starts the boot animation and hangs. But I have adb and complete shell access. Wipes don't help. Which if I was to guess means I have a java problem on the build VM. The C only kernel is fine, but nothing else works right. Big surprise there. That or something like the graphics blob didn't get packaged in. I'll play with it some more and might be able to build a working system by the time Unjustified Dev pushes some code up...
Steel01
Edit: And according to a logcat, I'm missing some so's. Don't know if I missed a build failure or if the official tree is broken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you get the closed source binaries extracted?

Unjustified Dev said:
Did you get the closed source binaries extracted?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I did. I'm running another build and capturing the output this time to see if there's a build failure. The files the log was complaining about are in a vendor prebuilt folder, but didn't get copied to out like most of the other files in that directory did. If this build does the same, I'll hand copy the files into the out directory and hope the command to build the system image just globs that directory.
Steel01

Steel01 said:
Yeah I did. I'm running another build and capturing the output this time to see if there's a build failure. The files the log was complaining about are in a vendor prebuilt folder, but didn't get copied to out like most of the other files in that directory did. If this build does the same, I'll hand copy the files into the out directory and hope the command to build the system image just globs that directory.
Steel01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suggest creating a better call to vendor blobs you can clearly find which ones are needed create an extract-files.sh script as so. I've began partially haven't had time to work on it. I chose a nvidia device because some of the blobs are the same naming less time.
https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_device_asus_tf700t/blob/cm-11.0/extract-files.sh
https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_device_asus_tf700t/blob/cm-11.0/proprietary-files.txt
https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_device_asus_tf700t/blob/cm-11.0/setup-makefiles.sh

Unjustified Dev said:
I suggest creating a better call to vendor blobs you can clearly find which ones are needed create an extract-files.sh script as so. I've began partially haven't had time to work on it. I chose a nvidia device because some of the blobs are the same naming less time.
https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_device_asus_tf700t/blob/cm-11.0/extract-files.sh
https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_device_asus_tf700t/blob/cm-11.0/proprietary-files.txt
https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_device_asus_tf700t/blob/cm-11.0/setup-makefiles.sh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, okay. It would be better to base off the tf701t, though. It's a tegra 4 device whereas the tf700t is a tegra 3. I'll see what I come up with after I flash stock back.
Steel01

Steel01 said:
Ah, okay. It would be better to base off the tf701t, though. It's a tegra 4 device whereas the tf700t is a tegra 3. I'll see what I come up with after I flash stock back.
Steel01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually I was just looking at it. We have an advantage we already have a device tree and I like their layout so I'm going to copy that when I have time and build from it.
Still some unsolved things I will discuss later

Unjustified Dev said:
Actually I was just looking at it. We have an advantage we already have a device tree and I like their layout so I'm going to copy that when I have time and build from it.
Still some unsolved things I will discuss later
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that would make it much simpler. I had that device tree building inside the cm11 repo a couple days ago, but I broke the kernel build somewhere along the way and haven't figured out what I did yet.
I'm currently working on getting the blob list together. Skimming the tf701t down to what exists on the shield, then building up from there. Will probably take a couple days with my schedule though, so you might beat me through it.
Steel01

Steel01 said:
Yeah, that would make it much simpler. I had that device tree building inside the cm11 repo a couple days ago, but I broke the kernel build somewhere along the way and haven't figured out what I did yet.
I'm currently working on getting the blob list together. Skimming the tf701t down to what exists on the shield, then building up from there. Will probably take a couple days with my schedule though, so you might beat me through it.
Steel01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got latest ota image from nvidia and extracted the system.img will be tomorrow when I finish gathering all blobs and I will send you a pm. once we get cwm working we can move forward wish the guy who compiled it got a change to upload his source so I can see how to do the dtb stuff . I know someone who can help I will contact them tomorrow

Unjustified Dev said:
I got latest ota image from nvidia and extracted the system.img will be tomorrow when I finish gathering all blobs and I will send you a pm. once we get cwm working we can move forward wish the guy who compiled it got a change to upload his source so I can see how to do the dtb stuff . I know someone who can help I will contact them tomorrow
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, great. I Got a hack of cm build together using the attached proprietary-files.txt and a prebuilt kernel from the shield tree. Ended up missing a couple so's, but I'm done for the night. Once you get the device tree to compile, can you push that to the github org and give me access to it?
On the dtb issues, doesn't the normal kernel compile output the dtb?
The official BoardConfig sets:
TARGET_USE_DTB := true
TARGET_KERNEL_DT_NAME := tegra114-roth
BOOTLOADER_SUPPORTS_DTB := true
Then kernel.mk sets:
KERNEL_DTS_PATH := $(KERNEL_PATH)/arch/$(TARGET_ARCH)/boot/dts/$(TARGET_KERNEL_DT_NAME).dts
BUILT_KERNEL_DTB := $(NV_KERNEL_INTERMEDIATES_DIR)/arch/$(TARGET_ARCH)/boot/$(TARGET_KERNEL_DT_NAME).dtb
and further down calls
+$(hide) $(kernel-make) $(TARGET_KERNEL_DT_NAME).dtb
That correctly gives me the dtb file. Though, chances are there are other lines I missed that affect it.
Steel01

Steel01 said:
Okay, great. I Got a hack of cm build together using the attached proprietary-files.txt and a prebuilt kernel from the shield tree. Ended up missing a couple so's, but I'm done for the night. Once you get the device tree to compile, can you push that to the github org and give me access to it?
On the dtb issues, doesn't the normal kernel compile output the dtb?
The official BoardConfig sets:
TARGET_USE_DTB := true
TARGET_KERNEL_DT_NAME := tegra114-roth
BOOTLOADER_SUPPORTS_DTB := true
Then kernel.mk sets:
KERNEL_DTS_PATH := $(KERNEL_PATH)/arch/$(TARGET_ARCH)/boot/dts/$(TARGET_KERNEL_DT_NAME).dts
BUILT_KERNEL_DTB := $(NV_KERNEL_INTERMEDIATES_DIR)/arch/$(TARGET_ARCH)/boot/$(TARGET_KERNEL_DT_NAME).dtb
and further down calls
+$(hide) $(kernel-make) $(TARGET_KERNEL_DT_NAME).dtb
That correctly gives me the dtb file. Though, chances are there are other lines I missed that affect it.
Steel01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read that from the OC kernel thread and it's 1am here so I'm done for the night as well. I am giving you permission to CM-Shield right now. I already cloned tf701 device tree and renamed it. I was working on adding in the files from nvidia tree some are going to go prebuilt might need some patches from nvidia git as well not so sure right now. I really need to get this device. Blindly working isn't much fun. As far as I know you use fastboot flash dtb that dtb is never updated and might not be needed not sure yet I have never had to deal with dtb.

Unjustified Dev said:
I read that from the OC kernel thread and it's 1am here so I'm done for the night as well. I am giving you permission to CM-Shield right now. I already cloned tf701 device tree and renamed it. I was working on adding in the files from nvidia tree some are going to go prebuilt might need some patches from nvidia git as well not so sure right now. I really need to get this device. Blindly working isn't much fun. As far as I know you use fastboot flash dtb that dtb is never updated and might not be needed not sure yet I have never had to deal with dtb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright. If you haven't got the dtb stuff straightened out by the time I get back to my dev machine tomorrow night, I'll tackle that. I've had some hobbyist experience with that on some embedded dev boards. In general, I wouldn't think the dtb would ever change. Definitely not within a kernel version. Definitely needed, though. But in the spirit of open source and building as much as possible from source, it will be good to make that build. Shouldn't be too difficult. And yes, 1:30 AM does bad things to cognizance. *passes out*
Steel01
Edit: I took a look at the tf701t kernel tree this morning. The dtb part may already be done if we base from there. A dts file already exists for roth (arch/arm/boot/dts) and the make file a dir up appears to glob the dts directory and build dtb's for each. I don't have access to a build tree to verify that atm, though. Bit if that's true, the kernel should be as simple as cloning tf701t, renaming its defconfig and modifying what little differences there are if any, then copying the dtb to the out directory.
Edit 2: A bit of googling turned up http://www.armadeus.com/wiki/index.php?title=Kernel-with-device-tree which says a config flag handles building dtb's. The tf701t config already sets CONFIG_MACH_ROTH=y, so I'm wondering if that kernel won't boot on the shield out of the box. Something I'll try once I get back to my dev machine tonight.

Well, I did get the dtb to build using the CM-Shield device tree and the kernel from tf701t. Haven't been able to test yet, though. And it was kind of a hack, but I don't know a better place to plug it than modules. In BoardConfig.mk after the two target kernel lines:
KERNEL_DTB:
*tab* make -C $(KERNEL_OUT) ARCH="arm" CROSS_COMPILE="arm-eabi-" tegra114-roth.dtb
*tab* mv $(KERNEL_OUT)/arch/arm/boot/tegra114-roth.dtb $(OUT)
TARGET_KERNEL_MODULES := KERNEL_DTB
That should probably pull arch and compiler prefix from cm env cars, but I don't know what they are. The dtb name should also be set as a const. Once I see if the kernel boots in a couple hours, I'll push my device branch up. Only kernel change was renaming the defconfig.
Steel01

Steel01 said:
Well, I did get the dtb to build using the CM-Shield device tree and the kernel from tf701t. Haven't been able to test yet, though. And it was kind of a hack, but I don't know a better place to plug it than modules. In BoardConfig.mk after the two target kernel lines:
KERNEL_DTB:
*tab* make -C $(KERNEL_OUT) ARCH="arm" CROSS_COMPILE="arm-eabi-" tegra114-roth.dtb
*tab* mv $(KERNEL_OUT)/arch/arm/boot/tegra114-roth.dtb $(OUT)
TARGET_KERNEL_MODULES := KERNEL_DTB
That should probably pull arch and compiler prefix from cm env cars, but I don't know what they are. The dtb name should also be set as a const. Once I see if the kernel boots in a couple hours, I'll push my device branch up. Only kernel change was renaming the defconfig.
Steel01
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So far going to push unmodified kernel now https://github.com/CM-Shield/android_device_nvidia_roth

Progress finally. Got a cwm recovery that boots and looks like it works plus fits in the partition. Most of the buttons aren't mapped yet and the screen is rotated, but that should be the east part to fix.
Steel01

Getting closer. But still no dice. Logcat of current iteration.
Steel01

ext2/3/4 filesystem create/fix tools (e2fstools pkg) static build for arm64 devices

e2fstools package, statically built for arm64 devices from Google's googlecode.com Oreo branch
NOTE: These will support ANY version of android's filesystems that use ext2 or ext3 or ext4. I built them from oreo branch as that one was the closest to compiling without any editing of the Makefiles. Don't let the name throw you off
I needed to run a modern fsck on a rooted device I have that I have been doing some hacking on.
The filesystem was in bad shape and the on-device e2fsck absolutely refused to check it while it was even mounted, even with the force option. Out of part desperation part determination I decided I would just build one myself. So I went and dug up the sources from googlecode.com, transfered them to my linux workstation, and after much fighting with gcc for cross compilation, finding a place in the google git repo where they actually build (hence going with orero), and having to tweak the c code even in a few places (mostly fixing includes and whatnot, no actual coding on my part), I succeeded.
As it says in the title, these are all the e2fstools binaries built from Google's googlecode.com source tree in their Oreo release branch. They are also compiled statically (no libraries are needed for them to function) so they should work absolutely fine on any device that has a 64bit arm (aarch64) processor. I have tested a handfull of them and they work perfectly fine on my Samsung Galaxy s8. In fact I used the fsck.ext4 binary to repair my system partition which it did perfectly.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/owb76hohnjzjdwe/e2fstools-oreo-aarch64-static.tar.gz?dl=0
Hope they come in as handy to someone else as they did me.
List of files follows:
Code:
[email protected]:~> tar tzf e2fstools-oreo-aarch64-static.tar.gz
e2fsbin/
e2fsbin/e2undo
e2fsbin/e2image
e2fsbin/badblocks
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext3
e2fsbin/fsck.ext4dev
e2fsbin/e2initrd_helper
e2fsbin/fsck.ext3
e2fsbin/e4crypt
e2fsbin/e4defrag
e2fsbin/mke2fs
e2fsbin/e2fsck
e2fsbin/fsck.ext4
e2fsbin/filefrag
e2fsbin/tune2fs
e2fsbin/e2freefrag
e2fsbin/uuidd
e2fsbin/e2label
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext2
e2fsbin/blkid
e2fsbin/logsave
e2fsbin/lsattr
e2fsbin/uuidgen
e2fsbin/findfs
e2fsbin/mklost+found
e2fsbin/dumpe2fs
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext4
e2fsbin/debugfs
e2fsbin/fsck.ext2
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext4dev
e2fsbin/resize2fs
e2fsbin/chattr
e2fsbin/fsck
PS: Now that I have a working arm64 cross compilation system setup, if anyone else desperately needs a working static binary for anything relatively simple to build (as in not 50 million dependencies for me to track down and install) and can send me or link me the sources for it and its dependencies, I would be happy to oblige.

Unfortunately, my device is armv7

buengeut said:
Unfortunately, my device is armv7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I forget, is that 32bit? If so i could fairly easily build new ones that are 32bit. Did you try them and they didnt work? If its 64bit they may work anyway, as these dont use any fancy instructions, and i did not build them even with -O1. I thought the main differences between the different "v"s of the same arch (32v64) was in libc and friends, of which these dont use as they are completely static so libc is built in.
I was even thinking of making this a flashable zip, but i hadnt bothered as no one replied to my initial post so i didnt think anyone cared ?️

partcyborg said:
I forget, is that 32bit? If so i could fairly easily build new ones that are 32bit. Did you try them and they didnt work? If its 64bit they may work anyway, as these dont use any fancy instructions, and i did not build them even with -O1. I thought the main differences between the different "v"s of the same arch (32v64) was in libc and friends, of which these dont use as they are completely static so libc is built in.
I was even thinking of making this a flashable zip, but i hadnt bothered as no one replied to my initial post so i didnt think anyone cared ?️
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ARMv7 is ARM 32bit, 64bit program will not work on a 32bit system.
Can you build e2fstools for ARMv7.

Sadly your link is down.
would you care to reupload?

LNQ said:
Sadly your link is down.
would you care to reupload?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure. I'll even make it flashable this time ?

Thanks alot, good sir!

Legend! I'd been dealing with not being able to repair my /data errors for the past few days since my Oreo update. The current TWRP (3.2.3.4) still has an ancient e2fsck that doesn't support the ext4 quota option that LG formats their Oreo data partition with. The updated version in /system/bin works while the OS is running which is why I knew I had errors, but I couldn't get it to run in TWRP to fix them because of the incompatible library files.
I was all set to reinstall my Android SDK and compile another version with inbuilt libraries when I decided to do one last search and found this thread where you'd already done it. So thanks for saving me a few hours of downloading/installing/remembering how to compile for Android all over again
I guess I can also vouch for it working on an LG V20. I don't know if it's just LG's version of Oreo that needs the later e2fsck or others too, but anyone who can't repair errors on their ext4 partitions in TWRP due to needing a newer e2fsck version should be able to use this version. I just copied the file fsck.ext4dev to /cache and ran it from there on my data partition.

Your link is dropbox banned...
Any chance you could attach the zip here...?

quotient said:
Your link is dropbox banned...
Any chance you could attach the zip here...?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seconded!
@partcyborg
Any chance you could put this file somewhere else? The above link is banned.
Thanks!

Hi,
I have a Oneplus 3 that after 3 years of use became sluggish as hell at file system access.
After reading thus document https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/hotstorage16/hotstorage16_ji.pdf
I would give a try to your e2fstools build.
Can you repost a link to download?
Thanks in advance

partcyborg said:
I forget, is that 32bit? If so i could fairly easily build new ones that are 32bit. Did you try them and they didnt work? If its 64bit they may work anyway, as these dont use any fancy instructions, and i did not build them even with -O1. I thought the main differences between the different "v"s of the same arch (32v64) was in libc and friends, of which these dont use as they are completely static so libc is built in.
I was even thinking of making this a flashable zip, but i hadnt bothered as no one replied to my initial post so i didnt think anyone cared ?️
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Late to this thread, great work!
I have the exact same problem.
Could you please post flashable zip and/or instructions how to load this into android?
Thank you

I found a binary on website, tested on Nexus 5 (ARMv7L 32bits)
GitHub - FerryAr/e2fsprogs-arm: Static build of e2fsprogs for Android Magisk Module
Static build of e2fsprogs for Android Magisk Module - GitHub - FerryAr/e2fsprogs-arm: Static build of e2fsprogs for Android Magisk Module
github.com

partcyborg said:
e2fstools package, statically built for arm64 devices from Google's googlecode.com Oreo branch
NOTE: These will support ANY version of android's filesystems that use ext2 or ext3 or ext4. I built them from oreo branch as that one was the closest to compiling without any editing of the Makefiles. Don't let the name throw you off
I needed to run a modern fsck on a rooted device I have that I have been doing some hacking on.
The filesystem was in bad shape and the on-device e2fsck absolutely refused to check it while it was even mounted, even with the force option. Out of part desperation part determination I decided I would just build one myself. So I went and dug up the sources from googlecode.com, transfered them to my linux workstation, and after much fighting with gcc for cross compilation, finding a place in the google git repo where they actually build (hence going with orero), and having to tweak the c code even in a few places (mostly fixing includes and whatnot, no actual coding on my part), I succeeded.
As it says in the title, these are all the e2fstools binaries built from Google's googlecode.com source tree in their Oreo release branch. They are also compiled statically (no libraries are needed for them to function) so they should work absolutely fine on any device that has a 64bit arm (aarch64) processor. I have tested a handfull of them and they work perfectly fine on my Samsung Galaxy s8. In fact I used the fsck.ext4 binary to repair my system partition which it did perfectly.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/owb76hohnjzjdwe/e2fstools-oreo-aarch64-static.tar.gz?dl=0
Hope they come in as handy to someone else as they did me.
List of files follows:
Code:
[email protected]:~> tar tzf e2fstools-oreo-aarch64-static.tar.gz
e2fsbin/
e2fsbin/e2undo
e2fsbin/e2image
e2fsbin/badblocks
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext3
e2fsbin/fsck.ext4dev
e2fsbin/e2initrd_helper
e2fsbin/fsck.ext3
e2fsbin/e4crypt
e2fsbin/e4defrag
e2fsbin/mke2fs
e2fsbin/e2fsck
e2fsbin/fsck.ext4
e2fsbin/filefrag
e2fsbin/tune2fs
e2fsbin/e2freefrag
e2fsbin/uuidd
e2fsbin/e2label
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext2
e2fsbin/blkid
e2fsbin/logsave
e2fsbin/lsattr
e2fsbin/uuidgen
e2fsbin/findfs
e2fsbin/mklost+found
e2fsbin/dumpe2fs
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext4
e2fsbin/debugfs
e2fsbin/fsck.ext2
e2fsbin/mkfs.ext4dev
e2fsbin/resize2fs
e2fsbin/chattr
e2fsbin/fsck
PS: Now that I have a working arm64 cross compilation system setup, if anyone else desperately needs a working static binary for anything relatively simple to build (as in not 50 million dependencies for me to track down and install) and can send me or link me the sources for it and its dependencies, I would be happy to oblige.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi nice compilation job! I know it's not always easy to compile these binaries from source...
Can you please reupload you archive here as attachment? Thanks!

lebigmac said:
Hi nice compilation job! I know it's not always easy to compile these binaries from source...
Can you please reupload you archive here as attachment? Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's a Magisk module that does cross-compilation specifically, you should get it.

By the way, the link for that drop box is dead.

I got a question about android kernels.

So I have a phone that doesn't have a kernel source, instead it has a Zimage. And sadly my dumbass can't really comprehend how to create a kernel source from zimage. Plus, even if I can, it's probably wayyy out of my league. Anyways, I was wondering if I would be able to compile a kernel without source. Plus if I create a kernel for my phone, could I use that kernel source to build other stuff too.

Zimage is kernel it is enough to make your own TWRP for your device ...

ineedroot69 said:
Zimage is kernel it is enough to make your own TWRP for your device ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea I already compiled a twrp for my device. I want to modify the ramdisk and make the battery last longer... maybe learn how to overclock.