Related
This thread is for my personal kernel patches that I use to patch the main android kernel source to be able to build a working kernel for 32A Magic/Sapphire devices. Various people have chipped in during the development of this, please see the old thread for details.
The old dev thread is located here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=548061
Who is this for?
Anyone that builds kernels for HTC 32A Magic/Sapphire devices and has experience patching, configuring and building kernels for the ARM architecture. This thread is not intended as a guide for beginners.
Please do not ask how to build a kernel or how to configure a kernel.
Why?
It is true that HTC have released their kernel sources here, but one would have to use this exact source and would be unable to simply build a patch to make a 2.6.29 kernel due to the numerous differences in the HTC kernel source. One could not also just rely on pulling a new kernel snapshot from the main GIT tree. This patch intends to patch the kernel from the main msm branch with as little changes as possible.
What do you need?
Get the latest snapshot here (currently c7f8bcecb06b937c45dd0e342450a3218b286b8d.tgz)
Do not try and patch HTC's Kernel Source.
Notes:
For the time being, this patch works properly for both 2.6.27 and the 2.6.29 branch.
You will not be able to build kernels for 32B devices after you use this patch. Please keep a separate copy of your kernel for 32B devices.
[NEW] Built a 2.6.29 kernel from cyanogens /proc/config.gz, everything seems to be working fine.
The Files:
Kernel Patch 2.6.27 TT V3
Example Kernel:
32A Cyanogen 2.6.29 (v4.0.4 - stable version, updated 8/28) with wlan.ko - ONLY FOR USE WITH 4.0.4 CYANOGEN ROM (Cyanogen contains extra modules on his ROM for this kernel)
There seems to be a bug in 4.0.4 ROM where wifi tethering is not working. I have reverted back to 4.0.3 with the above kernel and all is working fine including tethering.
32A Cyanogen 2.6.29 (v4.1.1) with wlan.ko - ONLY FOR USE WITH 4.1.1 CYANOGEN ROM (Built from cyanogen github w 4.0.4 config)
Multi-touch is working in the browser.
32A Cyanogen 2.6.29 (v4.1.5) with wlan.ko - ONLY FOR USE WITH 4.1.5 CYANOGEN ROM (Built from cyanogen github w/4.1.5 config)
Cyanogen says he will be changing the scheduler to BFS soon.
32A Cyanogen 2.6.29 (v4.1.6) with wlan.ko - ONLY FOR USE WITH 4.1.6 CYANOGEN ROM (Built from cyanogen github w/4.1.6 config)
Includes BFS scheduler. Wow, browser flies.
32A Cyanogen 2.6.29 (v4.1.7) with wlan.ko - ONLY FOR USE WITH 4.1.7 CYANOGEN ROM (Built from cyanogen github w/4.1.7 config)
Haven't really tested this completely but seems fine.
32A Cyanogen 2.6.29 (v4.1.8) with wlan.ko - ONLY FOR USE WITH 4.1.8 CYANOGEN ROM (Built from cyanogen github w/4.1.8 config)
Camera working, Camcorder not working.
32A Cyanogen 2.6.29 (v4.1.9.2) with wlan.ko - ONLY FOR USE WITH 4.1.9.2 CYANOGEN ROM (Built from cyanogen github w/4.1.9.2 config)
Everything appears to be working properly
32A Cyanogen 2.6.29 (v4.1.11.1) with wlan.ko - ONLY FOR USE WITH 4.1.11.1 CYANOGEN ROM (Built from cyanogen github w/4.1.11.1 config)
Everything appears fine.
ROM boot images:
V2.1 eViL hero 2.9.5x (2.6.29, BFS, SLUB) 32A only (apply as update) - THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL. Any bugs, let me know.
Bluetooth,Wlan,Gps - working. (Not sure about headset but bluetooth turns on)
Graphic intensive apps - Working (Armadillo roll works, Gears gets 60fps)
Camera working this time
eViL hero 2.9.9 (2.6.29, SLUB, Anticipatory) 32A only (apply as update)
Seems to work properly!
Hero Volume Fix:
Hero Volume Fix (tested on eViL Hero) (Do a backup first and then test) -- Apply as update
Disclaimer:
These patches are experimental and should not be used for mission critical operations without extensive testing. I nor anyone else, will be held responsible for the use of these patches. If any damage or loss is experienced due to these patches, these are at your own risk. You will not be reimbursed by anyone for any amount what-so-ever.
Changelog:
V3
Added comments to changed values - may help to find errors in the future.
Changed Makefile.boot back to V1 to be the same as official HTC Source - (initrd_phys-y := 0x19A00000)
Changed EBI_SIZE to the same size as the HTC released kernel source.
Changed VMALLOC to the same size as the HTC released kernel source.
V2
Changed Makefile.boot - changed to initrd_phys-y := 0x1A200000 (credit to rayman84)
Great work. Looking forward to this.
I will have to learn how to compile a kernel now.
Tigertael..in the prevous thread u said..
Bluetooth and led working..
* SDCard
* Memory - (All memory)
* Camera - (Special thanks to zinx @ Freenode!)
* GPU1 - (Pretty sure this is right)
* ADSP - (Pretty sure this is right)
* MDP - (Untested)
* LED's - working fine.
* GPS -working fine.
* Bluetooth - working fine.
* WLAN - Working 100%
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does this mean if a Hero Cooker use this kernel then Bluetooth and Led Problem will be fix?
lesjaw said:
Tigertael..in the prevous thread u said..
Bluetooth and led working..
Does this mean if a Hero Cooker use this kernel then Bluetooth and Led Problem will be fix?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately no. That was running on a stock ROM, not a Hero ROM.
The problem with Hero is the binaries that it was built upon was meant purely for the Hero. It's not known currently if you can correct this with a kernel, although I suspect you might be able to but only with the Hero sources for the kernel.
Even then it's a mission.
lesjaw said:
Tigertael..in the prevous thread u said..
Bluetooth and led working..
Does this mean if a Hero Cooker use this kernel then Bluetooth and Led Problem will be fix?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This means that bluetooth and the leds work correctly with a cupcake based rom. The Hero roms still have issues which will probably only be resolved when (if) the Hero source is released.
What in Cyanogen's kernel is working?
If multitouch is finally working, I love you
WaterMan! said:
What in Cyanogen's kernel is working?
If multitouch is finally working, I love you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't even know Cyanogen had multitouch capable apps in his ROM.
If he does, he might've had to use kernel patches of his own and if this is so, he hasn't shared them with me.
Name display
How it s possible to add a caller name display in the rom as we know fido and rogers support this option thanks
roriii said:
How it s possible to add a caller name display in the rom as we know fido and rogers support this option thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a paid carrier feature, nothing to do with the ROM.
Clinton
TigerTael said:
I didn't even know Cyanogen had multitouch capable apps in his ROM.
If he does, he might've had to use kernel patches of his own and if this is so, he hasn't shared them with me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the multitoch is more from some Android changes than kernel's , I read somewhere that The Kernel has already multitouch enabled, I fyou recall, it worked fine with Hero ROMs and stock kernel for Magic.
shwan_3 said:
I think the multitoch is more from some Android changes than kernel's , I read somewhere that The Kernel has already multitouch enabled, I fyou recall, it worked fine with Hero ROMs and stock kernel for Magic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do recall and I'm inclined to agree with you.
TigerTael said:
I do recall and I'm inclined to agree with you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't say that my stock Magic (Vodacom) had multitouch enabled... It is enabled in Hero roms but that is in someway due to the HTC closed-source framework. The Magic (and Dream) kernels had no specific way of interpreting multitouch data without a kernel hack or modified dalvikvm).
http://lukehutch.wordpress.com/2009/01/25/get-multi-touch-support-on-your-t-mobile-g1-today/
Not only does the framework/kernel have to support multitouch, but the applications too.
That's true
Hi, I'm using your kernel 2.6.29 (from Cyanogen) in the bcook's porting of Cyanogen 4.0.4 (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=544854). It works great but I don't understand why the multitouch doesn't work. It requires support by both the applications and kernel: the Cyanogen's browser package has multitouch (all the Dream and Magic 32B people use it) and your kernel should inherit it.
How did you compile it? Did you use, as base, the original kernel by Cyanogen from his git repository? Did you use his config file?
Thanks.
Actually, multi-touch IS working on the new kernel I built for 4.1.1
TigerTael said:
Actually, multi-touch IS working on the new kernel I built for 4.1.1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you mean that it is not working with the browser package in 4.0.4 or that you rebuild/fixed the kernel just for 4.1.1?
Can you provide a kernel for Cyanogen 4.0.4 (stable) with a working multitouch? I would keep my phone on the stable releases of Cyanogen. Thanks.
You can use the 4.1.1 kernel with 4.0.4 and multi-touch should work fine as well as all your other features. HOWEVER, please note that I could not get tether working in 4.0.4 or 4.1.1.
I am using 4.0.3 with 4.1.1 kernel, tether works, etc.
I'm using the new kernel from 4.1.1 in my Cyanogen 4.0.4 (I don't care about tethering): multitouch works well in the browser. Do you know if in Cyanogen there are other applications that support multitouch? Gallery don't.
The next step is to unify the kernel with the official one by Cyanogen (with some kind of board recognition on the boot phase) so we can just use the same official image.
Thanks to all!
I'm having a hard time finding a compiled list of MIUI compatible kernels. Can someone point me in the right direction or compile a list? I'd like to find a battery saver kernel and an OC kernel that are working for MIUI. Will Trinity kernels work? When using CM7, those were the best ones I used.
I'm fairly certain that as of this moment both morfic's Trinity kernel and faux123's 0.4.4 kernel work on the latest MIUI.
Any kernel written for CM7-based roms will work.... thats why. None of them are written for MIUI specifically because it is CM7-based.
Did a search but no dice...
Basically I am struggling to see the benefits, or differences for that matter, between having the official kernel source from HTC vs custom ones the clever devs have produced.
Am I right in thinking that kernel source for ICS has been released for our One S, but not the kernel source for JB yet?
In which case, how come there are custom kernels available for both ICS based ROMs, such as Beastmode Bricked Kernel, and JB based ROMs such as ElementalX kernel? They are both working and functioning, with similar enough features.
Is it just that all the custom ICS Kernels are built up on more stable source code and so have less errors and bugs etc? Whereas the JB Kernels are being built from scratch so it takes longer to overcome errors, and features have to slowly be added in one by one?
I am struggling to see the reason why everyone is so desperate for HTC to release the JB Kernel source code for the One S when the devs have already got us working custom kernels???
Yes, the kernel source for ICS has been released, but not for JB yet.
I dont keep much track of kernels for JB, but most of them are for AOSP roms. The ones for Sense roms can change some things, but most of the settings needs to be applied during installation of the kernel.
Custom kernels offers a lot of custimization. What kind of custimization? Well, changing the CPU Speed and voltage is one of them - which can be used to either increase performance, or increase battery life. They also (in most cases) come with much better governours, which increases both speed and performance (simply put - a governour is what decides when a certain cpu speed is supposed to be used).
And then theres other things, for example sweep2wake, USB OTG with a normal usb cable etc etc.
From my POV, the CPU settings is what appeals to me the most. And back when I used stock ICS it was the USB OTG feature that appealed the most.
If you dont care about any of these things, then theres not much point in a custom kernel.
To summorize in one line: Custom kernels offers a lot more features than a stock kernel.
I understand all the option custom kernels offer, but my real question was; why is there so much need for the official JB source code when there already are JB custom kernels?
And as I said, most of them are for AOSP roms. The ones for Sense roms can change some things, but most of the settings needs to be applied during installation of the kernel.
To clarify: with the source, we can change all the settings within the OS, without the need to reinstall the kernel to change the CPU speed for example.
ahhh I'm following you now I think. So with the official source code there is less need for Aroma installers etc? as all those settings can be edited 'on the go' rather than declared for good at the installation, and remain unchangeable until a new kernel is fastbooted?
Exactly. With a (real) custom kernel, you can for example overclock the CPU when you want to play a game, and when you're done playing, you can change it back. Without the need of a reboot/reinstall.
Also custom kernels for JB Sense ROMs unlock writing to the system folder.
Sent from my HTC One S Special Edition using xda app-developers app
mainly, you cannot produce a custom kernel without the source code. Elemental is actually the stock kernel using initd scripts. You cannot add sweep 2 wake, etc..
HTC_One_S | Xparent_ICS_Blue_Tapatalk_2 1.06_Hboot_Downgrade | unofficial_4.2.1_AOKP_Feb7 | Komodo_Kernel
Hi guys,
Some of you might have noticed that the old BLN from neldar implemented in most nexus s kernels doesn't work anymore with the cm10.2 based ROM. It also breaks the CM implementation of BLN, so by flashing a custom kernel on those ROM means we lose BLN altogether. So, is there a way to remove BLN from an already compiled kernel so it doesn't conflict with CM implementation? Most kernel are no more active (marmite, matrix...) So unless someone is able to build a new one from source without BLN, which I can't, we have to remove it from the zip file...
Thanks!
Hello community,
I am a rookie in the subject of kernels/roms and I would love to have some precious help from any1 that knows even the smallest of information. I recently installed CM kernel and CM nightly 0422. The thing is, I read in many forums (in here as well) that there is a kernel that can boost battery life to its max, Franco Kernel. But I also read that it is somehow incompatible with CM 10+ and causes bootloop if you install it with CM already in phone. What I can't understand is why can't I just simply replace CM kernel (like stock kernel was replaced by CM kernel) by Franco Kernel? What is the fact that I am missing?
ALL (and I mean ALL) help will be highly appreaciated, thanks for your time
T.
f33d_me_plz said:
Hello community,
I am a rookie in the subject of kernels/roms and I would love to have some precious help from any1 that knows even the smallest of information. I recently installed CM kernel and CM nightly 0422. The thing is, I read in many forums (in here as well) that there is a kernel that can boost battery life to its max, Franco Kernel. But I also read that it is somehow incompatible with CM 10+ and causes bootloop if you install it with CM already in phone. What I can't understand is why can't I just simply replace CM kernel (like stock kernel was replaced by CM kernel) by Franco Kernel? What is the fact that I am missing?
ALL (and I mean ALL) help will be highly appreaciated, thanks for your time
T.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
first off.. there is no magic pill to give your phone for battery life. battery life mostly depends on your personal usage, your personal setup, your apps used, and most importantly the quality of your phone/data connection. everything else is minor for battery life, including kernels.
cm uses CAF as its base now, they went away from aosp(like most kernels here). so everything that is aosp based is not compatible with cm anymore. franco kernel is aosp based(most kernels are). there are a few kernels that are CAF based built just for cm and cm based roms.
simms22 said:
first off.. there is no magic pill to give your phone for battery life. battery life mostly depends on your personal usage, your personal setup, your apps used, and most importantly the quality of your phone/data connection. everything else is minor for battery life, including kernels.
cm uses CAF as its base now, they went away from aosp(like most kernels here). so everything that is aosp based is not compatible with cm anymore. franco kernel is aosp based(most kernels are). there are a few kernels that are CAF based built just for cm and cm based roms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your time and your answer
First of all, I know for myself that there is no magic pill about battery life, I just read in too many threads that FK added a good portion of battery life (with same use of phone like when it had CM) ! Moreover it allows you to overclock (my) Nexus5 beyond 2.2GHz, something that CM doesn't allow you too (I know that overclocking kills battery, I just want to test something). What I don't understand is how can FK mess up with CM when both are different kernels and by installing FK over CM means that FK replaces CM. There is no CM in the end, only FK. Or not...? What have I understood wrong?
Thanks again
f33d_me_plz said:
Thanks for your time and your answer
First of all, I know for myself that there is no magic pill about battery life, I just read in too many threads that FK added a good portion of battery life (with same use of phone like when it had CM) ! Moreover it allows you to overclock (my) Nexus5 beyond 2.2GHz, something that CM doesn't allow you too (I know that overclocking kills battery, I just want to test something). What I don't understand is how can FK mess up with CM when both are different kernels and by installing FK over CM means that FK replaces CM. There is no CM in the end, only FK. Or not...? What have I understood wrong?
Thanks again
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes, franco would replace cm kernel if all worked right. but what you are doing is replacing cm kernel with franco kernel, but cm rom stays on your phone. franco kernel is incompatible with cm rom. since franco is aosp and cm is caf, your phone would never boot up all the way.
simms22 said:
yes, franco would replace cm kernel if all worked right. but what you are doing is replacing cm kernel with franco kernel, but cm rom stays on your phone. franco kernel is incompatible with cm rom. since franco is aosp and cm is caf, your phone would never boot up all the way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, if I am getting your point right, since one is aosp and the other is caf THAT is the reason why CM doesn't uninstall and will exist together with franco? Is there a way to permanently delete CM in order to install franco? Maybe to go back to stock kernel then install FK?
f33d_me_plz said:
So, if I am getting your point right, since one is aosp and the other is caf THAT is the reason why CM doesn't uninstall and will exist together with franco? Is there a way to permanently delete CM in order to install franco? Maybe to go back to stock kernel then install FK?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its not about the kernel, its about the rom. they are different things. when you flash a kernel(any), it replaces the kernel thats on your phone(kernels come with roms, cm kernel with cm rom). cm rom includes cm kernel, both are built from caf source. franco kernel is aosp, it is not compatible with cm rom. it has nothing to do with cm kernel, it replaces cm kernel when flashed. but you will never boot up your phone because it isnt compatible with cm rom.
simms22 said:
its not about the kernel, its about the rom. they are different things. when you flash a kernel(any), it replaces the kernel thats on your phone(kernels come with roms, cm kernel with cm rom). cm rom includes cm kernel, both are built from caf source. franco kernel is aosp, it is not compatible with cm rom. it has nothing to do with cm kernel, it replaces cm kernel when flashed. but you will never boot up your phone because it isnt compatible with cm rom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok, finally I got it, thanks to you Last question... is there a way to get FK now or am I just locked to caf due to CM "for life"? which way (if there is any at all) in your opinion is the best way to go from CM to FK? maybe go back to stock rom/kernel then flash FK? Will this work?
f33d_me_plz said:
ok, finally I got it, thanks to you Last question... is there a way to get FK now or am I just locked to caf due to CM "for life"? which way (if there is any at all) in your opinion is the best way to go from CM to FK? maybe go back to stock rom/kernel then flash FK? Will this work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no, they arent compatible at all. you can not use franco kernel with any cm based roms. you can change roms and use franco kernel with it, any aosp rom or even the stock rom. but cm isnt compatible at all with franko kernel.
simms22 said:
no, they arent compatible at all. you can not use franco kernel with any cm based roms. you can change roms and use franco kernel with it, any aosp rom or even the stock rom. but cm isnt compatible at all with franko kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks man !!
f33d_me_plz said:
Thanks man !!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If your looking for a good CAF kernel to run with a PAC or CM based ROM. I'd recommend the ElementalX CAF kernel. It's very stable, rich features, great performance and great battery life. Make sure to read the OP for directions and if you decide to try it out download the ElementalX R38 version with the aromma installer (not the express version) As with running any new kernel run it for a few days minimum to allow for it by on settle in.
There is another option for you to explore too - http://forum.xda-developers.com/google-nexus-5/development/cm11-users-heres-how-aospnon-caf-t2626961
This allows you to run a script that will basically De-CAF your rom and allow you to run a AOSP kernel on CM11ROMs.. Be sure to read the OP. It works with many CM11 and CM based ROMs, but not on all the newest versions. Definitely worth checking out.
xdrc45 said:
If your looking for a good CAF kernel to run with a PAC or CM based ROM. I'd recommend the ElementalX CAF kernel. It's very stable, rich features, great performance and great battery life. Make sure to read the OP for directions and if you decide to try it out download the ElementalX R38 version with the aromma installer (not the express version) As with running any new kernel run it for a few days minimum to allow for it by on settle in.
There is another option for you to explore too - http://forum.xda-developers.com/google-nexus-5/development/cm11-users-heres-how-aospnon-caf-t2626961
This allows you to run a script that will basically De-CAF your rom and allow you to run a AOSP kernel on CM11ROMs.. Be sure to read the OP. It works with many CM11 and CM based ROMs, but not on all the newest versions. Definitely worth checking out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your interest and time! I will sure check both your ROM and the De-CAF script soon and post my opinion/experience ! For newbies like me that are reading this post, here is a quite enbrightening thread about CAF and qualcomm processors (although it's Reddit, it's quite explanatory).
Peace!
T.
f33d_me_plz said:
Thanks for your interest and time! I will sure check both your ROM and the De-CAF script soon and post my opinion/experience ! For newbies like me that are reading this post, here is a quite enbrightening thread about CAF and qualcomm processors (although it's Reddit, it's quite explanatory).
Peace!
T.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, I forgot to paste the link cheers ! http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/1rt9md/eli5_what_is_caf_why_is_cm_going_caf_affects_the/