Related
Curious if any of the nuts and bolts kernel devs have comments on this new kernel patch?
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscent...x_kernel_patch_delivers_huge_speed_boost.html
What a difference 233 lines of code can make. That's the size of a small new patch to the Linux kernel's scheduler that has been found to reduce the average latency of the desktop by about 60 times. It's a small patch with a really, really big gain for desktop users of the open source operating system, in other words.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actual patch:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/19/123
What a blessing this would be...
Someone submitted patch to Cyan...
Doesn't look good though..
http://review.cyanogenmod.com/#change,417
I actually added the changes to ezterry's kernel last night and left it compiling this morning on my way out the door. My intution says this change wont help much, I already saw a ton of cgroup related code in the kernel... Never know until you try though.
Edit: After reading all the comments I probably won't even try booting the kernel at this point, lol!
The idea behind the patch is that it doesn't increase speed, just usability, which is something Android certainly needs. This was something tested on a 4 core CPU on Linux, so I don't know how much of a benefit it'll be for Android platforms.
Really, using BFS or BFQ scheduler would increase performance more on our phones. Sadly, neither is really stable, and cause memory leaks (on our phones at least)
Why isn't Jit stable yet? It's always disabled, and considered bad to enable.
Jit is actually stable for android. just not used on the G1 and magic because it uses to much memory compared to the bennifits.
on devices with larger RAM it is actually working quite well
There are a number of overclocking kernels available for webOS devices:
1) UberKernel
This is the kernel that is recommended for most users. It has been comprehensively alpha and beta tested, and has predefined profiles available that have been proven to be functional and safe for all users.
Instructions on how to install and use the UberKernel, and the corresponding Govnah application which is used to set the overclocking and other kernel parameters, can be found in the Preware Homebrew Documentation app in the official Palm app catalog (yes, Palm allows instructions on how to overclock your device in the official app catalog).
The official wiki page for UberKernel is at:
http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/Application:UberKernel
2) Other experimental kernels
In addition to the UberKernel, there are a number of other experimental kernels developed and released in separate alpha testing feeds. These experimental kernels are used for initial bleeding-edge alpha testing of new kernel development directions and new kernel features. Once these new features have been proven to be stable, they usually migrate into the next beta testing version of the UberKernel.
Instructions for how to install the experimental kernels and the conditions of use can be found at:
http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/Testing_Feeds
The official wiki pages for these experimental kernels are at:
http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/Application:PsychoKernel
http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/Application:WarthogKernel
All of these kernels (both the stable versions and the experimental versions) can be installed on your webOS device using Preware. You do not need to wipe or reflash your device, nor do you need to wipe any of your data (although we do advise you to always have full backups of your data whenever you are using overclocking kernels).
Complete source code for all kernel modifications can be found in the WebOS Internals git repositories at
http://git.webos-internals.org/?p=kernels/patches.git;a=summary
and the build system for building these kernels from these patches can be found in the WebOS Internals autobuilder git repository at
http://git.webos-internals.org/?p=preware/build.git;a=summary
Any kernel hackers who wish to participate in custom kernel development for webOS devices should make themselves known in the #webos-internals IRC channel on Freenode.
-- Rod Whitby
-- WebOS Internals Founder and Project Lead
Hi,
I have my AT&T GSM Palm Pre Plus running WebOS 2.1
I installed Govnah but I can't get the Uber Kernel thru Pre Ware, it says that there are not available overclockable kernels for WebOS 2.1 , I thought HP already released the kernel source.
Best Regards.
MGA2009 said:
Hi,
I have my AT&T GSM Palm Pre Plus running WebOS 2.1
I installed Govnah but I can't get the Uber Kernel thru Pre Ware, it says that there are not available overclockable kernels for WebOS 2.1 , I thought HP already released the kernel source.
Best Regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's available in the kernel testing feed. Details on the webos-internals Wiki:
http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/Testing_Feeds
-- Rod
testing feed?... becareful with kernels that are still in beta.. never know
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App
hakuchi18v said:
testing feed?... becareful with kernels that are still in beta.. never know
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thing with the Pre phone is that even if you flash a totally bad kernel, you simply do a recovery mode boot and use the webOS Doctor to flash back a good image.
http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/How_To_Recover
Or you do a recovery mode initramfs boot, mount the filesystem, and move the backup kernel back into place.
http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/Memboot
Even if you wipe the bootloader (but you would need to try *really* hard to do this, and no end-user ever has), you can still boot the OMAP over USB and flash a new bootloader.
http://www.webos-internals.org/wiki/Last_Resort_Emergency_BootLoader_Recovery
No real danger at all, since the device has been designed by Palm to be brick-proof.
There has never been a permanently bricked webOS device from homebrew or hacking. Period.
-- Rod
rwhitby said:
The thing with the Pre phone is that even if you flash a totally bad kernel, you simply do a recovery mode boot and use the webOS Doctor to flash back a good image.
Or you do a recovery mode initramfs boot, mount the filesystem, and move the backup kernel back into place.
Even if you wipe the bootloader (but you would need to try *really* hard to do this, and no end-user ever has), you can still boot the OMAP over USB and flash a new bootloader.
No real danger at all, since the device has been designed by Palm to be brick-proof.
There has never been a permanently bricked webOS device from homebrew or hacking. Period.
-- Rod
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
true..
Sent from my HTC HD2 using XDA App
I'm a bit confused. I've added the testing feed and I see a bunch of 1.4.x kernels. None of them have any indication in the description that htey are 2.1 kernels. The Uberkernel I have was released on 1/10, so I'm assuming that it is not the right one.
Sprint Pre running 2.1
drizek said:
I'm a bit confused. I've added the testing feed and I see a bunch of 1.4.x kernels. None of them have any indication in the description that htey are 2.1 kernels. The Uberkernel I have was released on 1/10, so I'm assuming that it is not the right one.
Sprint Pre running 2.1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're seeing 1.4.5 kernels, then you do not have the correct testing feed installed. This usually happens if you don't follow the wiki directions precisely and name the feed incorrectly. If you follow the wiki precisely and name the feed correctly, then Preware automatically updates the feed version on every boot.
-- Rod
I did follow the instructions, I think it has something to do with how the phone identifies its software. I manually added the 2.1.0 public kernel feed and tried to install Uber, but it errored out saying the kernel is not compatible.
drizek said:
I did follow the instructions, I think it has something to do with how the phone identifies its software. I manually added the 2.1.0 public kernel feed and tried to install Uber, but it errored out saying the kernel is not compatible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What webOS version is reported by your Device Info application?
If it says anything other than HP webOS 2.1.0, then you don't have a correct 2.1.0 installation.
-- Rod
Thanks.
I'm running an alternate kernel at 1000mhz.
Hope it get on stable quickly.
Best Regards.
rwhitby said:
What webOS version is reported by your Device Info application?
If it says anything other than HP webOS 2.1.0, then you don't have a correct 2.1.0 installation.
-- Rod
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.4.5
I thought it was supposed to say that to get on the App Catalog. I'm definitely running 2.1.0 though and it works fine.
Edit: I looked at the instructions again and it seems like you modified the scripts, right(i metadoctored on the first day)? Is there a way to force installation of the new kernel or should I go back and rerun the whole thing with the new script?
drizek said:
1.4.5
I thought it was supposed to say that to get on the App Catalog. I'm definitely running 2.1.0 though and it works fine.
Edit: I looked at the instructions again and it seems like you modified the scripts, right(i metadoctored on the first day)? Is there a way to force installation of the new kernel or should I go back and rerun the whole thing with the new script?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need to re-doctor.
-- Rod
Big fan of the AV8B Harrier II kernel here, and I'm glad to see it get on the 2.1 testing feed so quickly.
In my experience the best battery life I've experienced on any kernel, and it has been extremely stable for me as well.
How is the battery life when you have everything overclocked? I used to have a Pre -, but left cause of sprint before the plus even came out, and I am missing webos a lot. I am going to get a pre plus on verizon soon, and want to overclock it while I wait for the Pre 3 to come. I just want to know how much better the batter life is with a different kernal if at all.
card0124 said:
How is the battery life when you have everything overclocked? I used to have a Pre -, but left cause of sprint before the plus even came out, and I am missing webos a lot. I am going to get a pre plus on verizon soon, and want to overclock it while I wait for the Pre 3 to come. I just want to know how much better the batter life is with a different kernal if at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe the battery life should be worse, not better when overclocked. However, my pre- is overclocked and I haven't noticed any difference in battery life. Of course, how you use your phone plays a big role in the battery life so your experience may differ from mine. I recommend trying it for yourself.
Jive Turkey said:
I believe the battery life should be worse, not better when overclocked. However, my pre- is overclocked and I haven't noticed any difference in battery life. Of course, how you use your phone plays a big role in the battery life so your experience may differ from mine. I recommend trying it for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot depends on the voltage and governor of a kernel I have a nexus s clocked to 1.4 ghz with bit of undervolting and battery life is comparable to the stock kernel. Just depends on how the Dev builds it.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App
I was browsing the Optimas 2x forum today and ran into an awesome kernel with GPU overclock. which sounds pretty cool to me. also the dev mentioned something about overclocking "system bus" which improvers memory/2D/3D/etc. i think someone in this forum should take a look into this KERNEL and try letting us taste some of this goodness.
Here are the links:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1119771
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=14654927&postcount=36
while im no genius when it comes to this stuff, somehow i would suspect that people here are already looking into this.
i could be wrong tho lol
pyckvi said:
I was browsing the Optimas 2x forum today and ran into an awesome kernel with GPU overclock. which sounds pretty cool to me. also the dev mentioned something about overclocking "system bus" which improvers memory/2D/3D/etc. i think someone in this forum should take a look into this KERNEL and try letting us taste some of this goodness.
Here are the links:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1119771
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=14654927&postcount=36
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The person to ask this to is Morfic. He's all about tweaking bus speeds to improve not only cpu but gpu performance as well. But much of what you've already requested has been incorporated
jlevy73 said:
The person to ask this to is Morfic. He's all about tweaking bus speeds to improve not only cpu but gpu performance as well. But much of what you've already requested has been incorporated
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But where is he...??
G2X
CPU overclock is something that makes sense for us right now but what would a GPU overclock get us? To me thats just something that will lower the life of our phone with no real reward until games come out that our phone can't run. Right now our phone can run pretty much all games at full speed.
gpu overclocking would be sweet... now my question would be has anyone tried to load Optimas 2x kernel/software on the g2x since they are pretty much the same hardware(in theory you would think it would work)... i might even try to load this kernel onto my phone when i get home from work so if i mess anything up ill have my gear to fix it
crisis187 said:
gpu overclocking would be sweet... now my question would be has anyone tried to load Optimas 2x kernel/software on the g2x since they are pretty much the same hardware(in theory you would think it would work)... i might even try to load this kernel onto my phone when i get home from work so if i mess anything up ill have my gear to fix it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please don't try to load O2x software on your G2x.
pyckvi said:
I was browsing the Optimas 2x forum today and ran into an awesome kernel with GPU overclock. which sounds pretty cool to me. also the dev mentioned something about overclocking "system bus" which improvers memory/2D/3D/etc. i think someone in this forum should take a look into this KERNEL and try letting us taste some of this goodness.
Here are the links:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1119771
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=14654927&postcount=36
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I remember reading a while ago that GPU/System bus overclocking was attempted by some kernel dev, then later on, the dev realized through extensive testing that GPU and system bus clocks were locked, the changes to the kernel source had no effect (hardwired). Now this was a few months ago when I was reading up on Tegra kernel development before I got my G2x. Now all these could have been obsolete, and maybe now someone has found a way to do the above via kernel source updates.
Another issue that most people don't mention here and many people have been guilty of, is the GPL issue. The guy who supposedly did this overclocking has not published his kernel source code anywhere (GPL/XDA rules issues), so no one can examine what he did and prove that it worked....
GideonX said:
Please don't try to load O2x software on your G2x.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
have you tried it yet though is my question
im not worried if i flash a kernel and it doesnt work i can reflash my old kernel if it doesnt work and gets stuck into a bootloop
crisis187 said:
have you tried it yet though is my question
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Someone in another thread tried this and it messed up their baseband. A restore doesn't fix it apparently.
Big rush dog, the tiamat kernel guru and Guy getting engadet headlines for oc the xoom to 1.7 ghz has gpu oc in his kernels. I will be honest though, I can't tell the difference except maybe video streaming works a little smoother. I personally don't think it is worth the devs time...
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
Howdy! I'm the developer of that kernel
To be honest the GPU overclocks aren't all that beneficial. There is a little bit of a speed bump (I managed to get the highest score on nenamark2 for example). But the difference is was 27fps vs 32fps. If someone is interested in incorporating that into the g2x I'll be happy to show them the changes I've made. I haven't released the source because I'm lazy but there isn't too much to it.
Actually, if you look at the voltKernel sources for the O2X you'll see the same changes there.
chuckhriczko said:
CPU overclock is something that makes sense for us right now but what would a GPU overclock get us? To me thats just something that will lower the life of our phone with no real reward until games come out that our phone can't run. Right now our phone can run pretty much all games at full speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, superficial benchmarks like quadrant can be pushed to 5400 only with max cpu oc.
However, did you notice how 1.2 thru 1.5 gets you the same fps with no added benefit than more heat created?
Pushing other things other than cpu should let us remove bottlenecks and not tighten them up.
If you want your G2x to life 20yrs, 1.5ghz is not the way to go.
I have no kernel ready for release, to notice changes, I stuck to 1.5ghz, but the final result will be more likely 1.2 or 1.3ghz.
Maybe with a "don't hold my hand, give me freedom or give me death" DBU version at 1.5Ghz later.
I'm not shy to increase vcore on a SoC. But unlike the Nexus S, this thing gets HOT, fast.
Avetny pointed out that thread, I'll see if fallout hit something I have missed so far.
The clocks get compared to chip defaults in many places, choosing the smaller of the two, so it's just tedious replacing them with sane defaults, unless I stick to my current approach of offsets instead of absolutes.
We'll see.
That's also the reason I don't update my kernel often. Right now commits in cm git are only preparatory, config changes that made things smoother I already used.
I'll release something if they finish their version of BLN.
Or if I'm happy with gpu/bus/ram oc/tweaks.
not going to make people flash a kernel for no reason. As jlevy can attest, kernel not following cm git, not even based on it can work very well.
Not having latest cm commit on kernels that take another approach is not always useful.
Especially if we track regressions that cm devs back out later, that's all this gains.
So yes, there will be a gpu oc, when it's ready.
Great!
@ fallout0 thank you i hope that you can help out one of our devs on this.
morfic said:
Yes, superficial benchmarks like quadrant can be pushed to 5400 only with max cpu oc.
However, did you notice how 1.2 thru 1.5 gets you the same fps with no added benefit than more heat created?
Pushing other things other than cpu should let us remove bottlenecks and not tighten them up.
If you want your G2x to life 20yrs, 1.5ghz is not the way to go.
I have no kernel ready for release, to notice changes, I stuck to 1.5ghz, but the final result will be more likely 1.2 or 1.3ghz.
Maybe with a "don't hold my hand, give me freedom or give me death" DBU version at 1.5Ghz later.
I'm not shy to increase vcore on a SoC. But unlike the Nexus S, this thing gets HOT, fast.
Avetny pointed out that thread, I'll see if fallout hit something I have missed so far.
The clocks get compared to chip defaults in many places, choosing the smaller of the two, so it's just tedious replacing them with sane defaults, unless I stick to my current approach of offsets instead of absolutes.
We'll see.
That's also the reason I don't update my kernel often. Right now commits in cm git are only preparatory, config changes that made things smoother I already used.
I'll release something if they finish their version of BLN.
Or if I'm happy with gpu/bus/ram oc/tweaks.
not going to make people flash a kernel for no reason. As jlevy can attest, kernel not following cm git, not even based on it can work very well.
Not having latest cm commit on kernels that take another approach is not always useful.
Especially if we track regressions that cm devs back out later, that's all this gains.
So yes, there will be a gpu oc, when it's ready.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks morfic i hope everything goes smooth with your kernel, i would love to test it out once u feel it is ready. and thanks for not rushing it.
faux123 said:
I remember reading a while ago that GPU/System bus overclocking was attempted by some kernel dev, then later on, the dev realized through extensive testing that GPU and system bus clocks were locked, the changes to the kernel source had no effect (hardwired). Now this was a few months ago when I was reading up on Tegra kernel development before I got my G2x. Now all these could have been obsolete, and maybe now someone has found a way to do the above via kernel source updates.
Another issue that most people don't mention here and many people have been guilty of, is the GPL issue. The guy who supposedly did this overclocking has not published his kernel source code anywhere (GPL/XDA rules issues), so no one can examine what he did and prove that it worked....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should talk to Fallout0 he seems like he got past the system bus/GPU locked issue. both of you can maybe learn something new from each other. & it would be awesome if the both of you can work on a kernel together.
Wouldn't a higher clocked G2x cause more heat? Heat being the reason this things reboots so often? Maybe a slower G2x is the way to go.
Would overclocking the gpu help run nds4droid any better? What else would ocing the gpu do? Everything seems to be very fast as it is lol
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
dkb218 said:
Wouldn't a higher clocked G2x cause more heat? Heat being the reason this things reboots so often? Maybe a slower G2x is the way to go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pushing cpu more I don't see useful other than keep up with your buddy's Nexus S' quadrant scores and make sure your hands stay warm in a cold Chicago winter.
I build kernels usually when things stutter or otherwise annoy me. The pushing the OC usually comes by request of those who just want more more more.
I do like to remove bottle necks.
The hardwired clocks. Well the.cpu ones are hardwired too.
The gpu/bus oc works, until boost and throttling kick in, where again values are compared to hardwired values. using offsets after the comparison would be the way around without killing boosting and throttling.
Guess main thing that stopped me is the heat at 1.5ghz, and the frowns over 1.2ghz and 1.3ghz kernels, without further "what else is in there"
Still hoping fallout can share what he/she has, it'll help making this a reality, sooner.
It's tedious. Most of all.
I'm sorry about the long post if you want to get straight to my question, skip the first paragraph
I was avoiding this because it is a fairly noob question set (and I've seen a history of new members on XDA being berated for questions that could have been answered by any amount of research and I'm unsure whether my question set will fall into that category), but I just can't do anymore research since most information I'm finding is not in one place and I can't seem to find a full feature list for any of the ROMs and Kernels I research and look into, and on top of that there are SOOO many.... I'm about to pull my hair out of my head and my skull along with it, and every search engine I use is contemplating homicide (google has divorced me and is planning my murder for the life insurance money, and duck-duck-go is biting my heels with its bill) and firefox is planning a suicide bombing taking the 50 or more tabs with it along with my RAM, and I'm not terribly sure any of those actions aren't justified (and also, as you can probably tell, I'm going NUTS!). Just the amount of information and the amount of digging I have to do to find a single answer for the MANY questions I have regarding these ROMs and Kernels is staggering (I remember having similar problems searching to find the right linux distribution for me, but it wasn't this hard and after 2 or more weeks of searching, I didn't find myself not having any substantial answer, nor did it actually take two weeks)
anyways, enough with the crazy intro to the question
My current phone is a Nexus S 4g (sprint) currently running the stock ROM and Kernel, gingerbread 2.3.7 (build GWK74). I have it rooted and I have clockwork mod recovery flashed as well as ROM manager installed. I'm looking for ROM and Kernel recommendations (and combinations, I want to make sure they're compatible) as well as reasons why they might fit my needs
I need a ROM and Kernel that:
1. Won't reduce any of the current features I have on the Stock ROM/Kernel I have (though I don't use NFC so if google wallet isn't applicable, that's not a loss)
2. Will allow more steps in frequencies on my CPU (so CPUtuner won't tell me it can only go between 100Mhz and 1Ghz when I attempt to manually change the frequency, I can get one governor to get me 400mhz, but that only adds one more step to the 2 current steps, and performance and powersave governors don't work with the stock kernel, not that it's a big deal, I prefer conservative and ondemand)
3. will allow voodoo control & voodoo color (or any other feature that might be useful, though BLN isn't a big deal to me)
4. Has better battery life (while in use, use being things similar to internet browsing) than stock ROM/Kernel (so UI flare isn't completely necessary, and underclocking and/or undervolting would be great, as long as it doesn't sacrifice speed)
5. The UI should be less jittery than I'm seeing the stock react half the time (though that might be an effect of the CPU tuner)
6. I would like overclocking (however if that interferes with battery life, then I can live without it as long as it doesn't make the speed worse than stock)
7. this coincides with #1, but I think it should be said anyways: I don't want any connectivity (besides maybe NFC) to be affected adversely, so I want 4g, 3g (given), wifi, tethering, etc...
a few questions I have that I can't seem to clear up:
1. I'm beginning to develop software for android, so I'm wondering if any ROM and/or Kernel will affect ADB or any connection to my PC at all
2. What advantages do CM7.1 nightlies have over the CM7.1 stable, and any disadvantages (because I would prefer stable unless there's something on the nightlies I might want)
3. And any advantages ICS ports might have to anything listed above? and compatible kernels?
well, I have done some research, and the two ROMs I'm currently considering are Oxygen and CM7.1 (stable). I like Oxygen because it's a barebones rom with a few extra features that (from what I've seen thus far) don't interfere with performance or battery life. I like CM7.1 because it seems to be fairly quick and has a good feature set.
now I know that the performance might be more affected by the kernel than the ROM, so the kernels I've been most interested in are Netarchy and Trinity. Netarchy has decent speeds (though I'm unsure of its effect on battery life) and has a great list of features (such as voodoo control). Trinity is fast (depending on which version, I was debating on the overclocked version that doesn't go to the highest clock setting and the undervolted version which stayed at 1ghz but had great powersaving) because of its speed and/or powersaving, but I'm unsure of all of the features it has)
I had read that CM has its own kernel, but I can't find any substantial evidence to it besides a few short forum posts on various forums. I can't find anything on the CM site that backs up those claims (I could have just missed it though)
I was considering MIUI but I had heard that it had some translation problems from chinese into english and I'm not sure if you can get the text to read from left to right (and be alligned that way). Not sure if that has been fixed and if the features on there are necessary and/or make it difficult to use
I'm asking here because I'm sure I've barely scratched the surface on all of the ROMs and Kernels that might be helpful to me (and hope to get info from more knowledgeable people)
I have been referring to this thread
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1067813
I'm sure somethings I want aren't possible or if they are, there's negligible gain (I'm starting to thing that about battery life with the more I read)
once again, I apologize for the extremely long post, as you can tell I'm verbose (as it's really the only way I know how to get my point across)
if you need further information, feel free to ask. If any information needs to be cut off (especially if this needs to be cut shorter) let me know
I hate to do this but
BUMP
my main problem with this is that most of these roms and kernels seem to do the same thing but all have different problems
I've also found that some versions are more buggy then others which has thrown yet another curve ball into my research (not as bad as ICS but bad enough). I should have expected it but it's just one more thing to go digging for
an answer at all would be nice, other than just the views with no post. Even if the next person's answer is "this is stupid" or something of the like
even that would help me believe it or not
Honestly, your answer is the same one everyone else gets. Try them out and see. Most of the kernels out there should work with any of the ROMs, even the stock ROM. Personally, I have had no real issues with any ROM/kernel combo I have tried. I use CM because I am so used to the features they add and I dislike the stock GB theme. I'm using the last nightly cm7 had because there was something they didn't have in the stable but I don't recall what that was. But most any ROM or kernel you get for gB is likely done being developed for. The combination in my signature serves me very well. A lot of people do like oxygen. I just missed cm too much. Most of the kernels should allow for all of the wants you have.
I also ran cm9 with the glados kernel and honestly, it ran perfect for me. My only issue was with a few apps i use not wanting to cooperate.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G running CM7/franco.Kernel
Sent from my Nexus S 4G running CM7/franco.Kernel
alright thanks (which the button did for me)
I understand that (and some threads I looked over had answers like that, so I figured someone might say something along the lines of "try it out") I was mostly looking for input from past users about some ROM or kernel
I just don't want to end up with a broken phone before I leave for a week or two (to a rural area for a couple of days)
thanks for the answer, all I really need to know now is have there been any problems with any of them running ADB or transferring files from PC to phone?
EDIT: well I'm going to continue trying to get android SDK working on my linux OS, and I'm going to install and run a few ROMs and Kernels
ROMs I'm going to try: CM7.1 Stable, Oxygen, CM9
Kernels: Netarchy, Trinity, matri1x, and glados (with CM9)
Okay. So apparently Samsung have made some changes to the kernel in S7 compared to other Samsung's.
In order to make the kernel boot, you have too disable tima_rkp. But disabling tima_rkp makes the kernel unstable.
We can make the Kenrel stabel, by disabling the FP lock. But then again. A very used feature of the phone is useless
I figured out by putting out a bounty, maybe some developers are willing too have a look at it, and see if it's a way too make this work. Currently Samsung have 4 kernel sources out here
Anyway. Don't let me disturb you any more, and let's start this bounty tread.
I'll start with pledging $50 for the one who can make a stable custom kernel for our beloved S7 edge. (935F/fd)
Please notice, there is no minimum pledge. You are free to pledge what ever amount you want too.
Current status : $396 bounty
i am in with 50$ too..!!
Same here i will pledge $50 worth every penny :highfive:
£50 here which is about $71
$50 from me too
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
i already asked the hacker for help to built a kernel but he doesnt have his S7 anymore..
Sent from my SM-G935F using XDA-Developers mobile app
Okarina26 said:
i already asked the hacker for help to built a kernel but he doesnt have his S7 anymore..
Sent from my SM-G935F using XDA-Developers mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I think he Sent it back the same day unfortunately :/
USD 75
I'm an S7 930F user, but Edge 935F development is more active, and there is little to no difference anyway. I'm sure , if needed, it can be recompiled for 930F.
Out of curiosity, why is a bounty needed for making a custom kernel for the S7? The rom development was quite active on the S6, so why is it so "dead" at least from a kernel perspective here? I mean, is a custom kernel just not happening for the S7 or will we set some in the near future?
Faspaiso said:
Out of curiosity, why is a bounty needed for making a custom kernel for the S7? The rom development was quite active on the S6, so why is it so "dead" at least from a kernel perspective here? I mean, is a custom kernel just not happening for the S7 or will we set some in the near future?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As its my understanding, the major problem with a custom kernel, is the implementation of tima_rkp, Samsung have been using on this kernel. Just in order too have the kernel boot, you have to disable it, but then again, you will have a unstable kernel. It can be some stable, if you don't use any hard-coded security features, like fingerprint unlock and so on.
Swipe to wake works, with very few too none reboots. But still it isn't stable.
That's why it's a little bounty out, too trigger the willingness of other developers too take some of their free time and have a look at it.
As you prob noticed, there isn't any custom kernel out yet, tho the S6 hade a few kernels out just a week after release.
I'll take a look at it later, but I can't promise anything.
Faspaiso said:
Out of curiosity, why is a bounty needed for making a custom kernel for the S7? The rom development was quite active on the S6, so why is it so "dead" at least from a kernel perspective here? I mean, is a custom kernel just not happening for the S7 or will we set some in the near future?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To make it simple, its as simple as
Open Source
and No Source.
exynos = closed source (Making development very difficult)
Snapdragon = Open Source (Everyone can have a go)
I can only assume the S6 had both a Snapdragon and exynos variant and the exynos being less popular
dave7802 said:
To make it simple, its as simple as
Open Source
and No Source.
exynos = closed source (Making development very difficult)
Snapdragon = Open Source (Everyone can have a go)
I can only assume the S6 had both a Snapdragon and exynos variant and the exynos being less popular
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope
Samsung's already release KERNEL source for exynos S7 or else this thread won't even exist.
This thread is here because of the new change samsung had made to S7 kernel (mostly security stuff) make modifying the kernel without too much trouble hard
Also S6 had only Exynos version because of the underperforming sd810.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
dave7802 said:
To make it simple, its as simple as
Open Source
and No Source.
exynos = closed source (Making development very difficult)
Snapdragon = Open Source (Everyone can have a go)
I can only assume the S6 had both a Snapdragon and exynos variant and the exynos being less popular
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's only for custom roms, which is the reason we *might* never see a stable AOSP Rom. There are sources out for the kernel.
Bla cba with the response, I was more down the lines of AOSP
as i dont see any other real benefit to a custom kernel.
Its not like the S7 suffers from Lag / Performance issues or battery draining.
(My original replay was much longer going into detail, stupid page timeout)
dave7802 said:
To make it simple, its as simple as
Open Source
and No Source.
exynos = closed source (Making development very difficult)
Snapdragon = Open Source (Everyone can have a go)
I can only assume the S6 had both a Snapdragon and exynos variant and the exynos being less popular
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
s7/ s7edge also got its own Snapdragon Version
pigmich said:
s7/ s7edge also got its own Snapdragon Version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Closed bootloader...
dave7802 said:
Bla cba with the response, I was more down the lines of AOSP
as i dont see any other real benefit to a custom kernel.
Its not like the S7 suffers from Lag / Performance issues or battery draining.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed. The main reason for a custom kernel for me has always been for permissive, which V4A requires to work. But there is now a work around for this on enforcing kernels so I'm really not that bothered. It's not as if Exynos S7/S7E devices suffer from battery life issues or overheat problems which underclocking and/or undervolting could fix. It works very well as is, I get between 6 and 7 hours SOT on average and it's very stable in all other departments. In short, the need for a custom kernel has greatly diminished on this device, especially in comparison to the S6/S6E/S6E+ which all had terrible battery life. But if it's important to some people then good luck in getting one sorted.
I'M a 930 user, but it will fix our problems as well.
50$ from me.
Here are the temporary solutions.
Way A:
Remove /system/lib/libbauth* , /system/lib64/libbauth*
Way B: (If you want to completely disable (or bypass) TEE)
Remove /system/lib/libbauth* , /system/lib64/libbauth*
Replace /system/lib64/hw/gatekeeper.exynos8890.so,/system/lib64/hw/keystore.exynos8890.so with these i uploaded.
Both of them will make your FP Sensor not working.
(Lock Screen will work)
But,at least,you get a stable custom kernel.
I am trying to re-implement FP sensor support to system with TEE disabled.
Here is some files from somewhere confidential and a simple kernel compiled by me and my build.prop.