Database Develop

[kernel][testing]Unhelpful Kernel (from Captivate)

I'm trying to get the kernel I've been working on for Captivate working on Vibrant. This poses a bit of a problem, because while I have access to a Vibrant kernel and initramfs, and a known-working config for Vibrant, I lack access to a phone.
I've forked a test branch based on what I have so far. I would appreciate pretty much any of the following:
a volunteer to build this kernel or test a binary
a volunteer to help with Vibrant development
any other Vibrant-specific details that don't apply to Captivate or to SGS in general
I have already built a binary, but it is mostly untested. I want to make it very clear that this is a testing kernel. It should work, it should not break anything... but it might not boot, it might wipe data, I haven't heard of it happening to anybody yet but it's certainly not impossible that it might damage hardware. These are unlikely, except for not working, but are all possible outcomes of trying this kernel. If you want to test this, read the OP in the thread for the Captivate version, have backups of your data ready, preferably duplicated to a hard drive or an SD card that is removed before testing. Have Odin3 and a stock Vibrant kernel on hand, and have ClockworkMod recovery installed.
If it hangs starting up, wait a bit, then pull the battery and start in recovery without trying to start up normally. Then, start clockworkmod, mount /system, and use adb to pull /system/user.log - this should contain a log of what happened when the user init scripts ran, and may provide clues as to what went wrong. You can make sure it doesn't include anything you don't want to reveal, and just PM it to me or join #sgs_dev on freenode and talk to me or some other developers there - perhaps a dev with a Vibrant will have a better idea where to start.
In the long term, I would not mind somebody forking the github repository to work on any Vibrant-specific issues. I can then try to pull changes from a fork and do builds for both phones, if somebody doesn't want to do the Vibrant builds themselves.
Good luck, and thank you.

if no one volunteers by the time I finish installing openSUSE I'll give it a whirl. the binary that is.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

ill be more than happy to test the binary

I too will be more than happy to give any sort of help possible. Should this be a start from a stock kernel and build deal, ie stock kernel stock rom just rooted with clockwork?
Sent from my Vibrant using tapatalk pro

If you're using a lagfix with the playlogos hack you should undo it first, or set up your user init script to run in the new early user init. Other than that anything that works with a stock kernel should still work.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
EDIT: "lagfix", thx swype.

Unhelpful said:
If you're using a ladies with the playlogos hack you should undo it first, or set up your user init script to run in the new early user init. Other than that anything that works with a stock kernel should still work.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm about to build from your source i just forked to see whats diff then mine. They look though to be about the same except for nilFS
I will probably fork and maintain a vibrant tree with ivan who also has a Vibrant. That way we can get the best of both worlds. And being that we are in the same IRC we pretty much have identical mods to our kernels.
So most likely any changes you make to your captivate Kernel will end up in the vibrant branch as well and I also have the device to test with
See ya in IRC

anomalous3 said:
if no one volunteers by the time I finish installing openSUSE I'll give it a whirl. the binary that is.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
haha if ur talking about the linux distro i know what u mean

Excellent news! I have some things in my tree I think you could use here, too, but it's much easier to have a developer with a Vibrant who can build them and test immediately.

What advantages does the captivate kernal have over the vibrant kernal, if any?
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk

rei165 said:
What advantages does the captivate kernal have over the vibrant kernal, if any?
Sent from my SGH-T959 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The stock captivate kernel doesn't have any "advantages" and wouldn't really work. Unhelpful, however, has added nilfs support to the captivate kernel as well as some other tweaks, and has now made these changes available to the Vibrant community. As I understand it, NILFS mounts, reads, writes, and unmounts faster on our devices than any of the other filesystems he tested, so there's hope for a permanent lagfix.

I tried this kernel, it does boot but my existing lagfix scripts don't work with it, so I lose all my data. No big deal to fix from recovery, just revert to stock before messing with it if you want to test it. As mentioned, no real advantage either way, but it's nice to have options.
If there is interest, I'll fix my lagfix scripts to run on this kernel. Reverting back to JAC OVv4 works without hassle via clockwork.

Most Complete/Stable Vogue Android Build

So I've just recently flashed my vogue with myns donut for a couple days and It was pretty good. The camera worked but no video and neither did the gps. I understand that for verizon you have to follow a specific procudure to get that to work so that makes sense. I'm just curious to what android roms they are using for their vougue. I'm looking for one that has the most working features. Let me know what it is and how you had it set up.

For my Fresh Froyo although remember android no is 100% stable but Fresh Froyo is very good.

If you know what you want my barebones build is known to be one of the fastest and most stable builds. With that though you need to get the apk's to what you want and add them in. It is meant to be as cut down to the minimum to be light and lithe on our devices.
Another way to get apps is to use the market, I have the most recent version of the market in my build. CM 6.1 is Froyo based so you have video and all the other froyo features.

aceoyame said:
If you know what you want my barebones build is known to be one of the fastest and most stable builds. With that though you need to get the apk's to what you want and add them in. It is meant to be as cut down to the minimum to be light and lithe on our devices.
Another way to get apps is to use the market, I have the most recent version of the market in my build. CM 6.1 is Froyo based so you have video and all the other froyo features.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tested more than 10 ROM including the yours and I am sorry to tell you than ever before me to worked well even the last released CM 6.1, does not work properly with the kernel that is in my signature and is the one that works best with the USB sync and just by this already this ruled out your ROM, so I'm still saying Fresh Froyo for me is the more stable and clean ROM of froyo that I tested.

Josue_181 said:
I tested more than 10 ROM including the yours and I am sorry to tell you than ever before me to worked well even the last released CM 6.1, does not work properly with the kernel that is in my signature and is the one that works best with the USB sync and just by this already this ruled out your ROM, so I'm still saying Fresh Froyo for me is the more stable and clean ROM of froyo that I tested.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well mine is assuming you want to use the .32 kernel. Which with Clemsyn's kernel works very well. Battery life sucks though since the changes haven't been committed to git yet. But with that kernel I have not had any data loss since it came out.

Josue_181 ......Any chance you could post where you got the exact images/files etc. if it's not too much trouble. Thanks! I hope to run from haret if possible.
I have searched but it has been a while since I looked in this section. Is it DZO's Fresh Froyo you use and I cannot find Kernel: 2.6.25 10-31-10??? Hope you can help, thanks.

aceoyame said:
Well mine is assuming you want to use the .32 kernel. Which with Clemsyn's kernel works very well. Battery life sucks though since the changes haven't been committed to git yet. But with that kernel I have not had any data loss since it came out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
aceoyame,
How would it be possible to get the battery enhancements into the git? We need help!

aceoyame said:
Well mine is assuming you want to use the .32 kernel. Which with Clemsyn's kernel works very well. Battery life sucks though since the changes haven't been committed to git yet. But with that kernel I have not had any data loss since it came out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would have to prove with that kernel I know how to adapt the kernel Clemsyn's to our Vogue if it works I comment as I was to see if I change my mind about your ROM
krwilson said:
Josue_181 ......Any chance you could post where you got the exact images/files etc. if it's not too much trouble. Thanks! I hope to run from haret if possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The thread Fresh froyo this here, as well as guides for the installation of haret/nad, only is question search and read...

Prowess said:
aceoyame,
How would it be possible to get the battery enhancements into the git? We need help!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
our vogue would not benefit from the battery enhancements since our kernels were designed for our battery

Okay so you say fresh froyo is one of the best? I looked it up but I am confused about what to download. Any advice would be great. I know how to install it I just dont know what file is the latest/best

loffyg said:
Okay so you say fresh froyo is one of the best? I looked it up but I am confused about what to download. Any advice would be great. I know how to install it I just dont know what file is the latest/best
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is my situation too....as I posted above. I know how to install, but am unsure of exactly what you are recommending as to the Fresh Froyo files. Thanks again.

Well try to be brief to that understand... (my English is very bad).
They must go to the thread of Fresh Froyo and go to this page, there download the ROM latest although I recommend the penultimate that is in my signature the most recent gave me problems.
The ROM download whith the name system-froyo-us-unodex-XX-XX-XX (X are date) have to rename it to androidinstall.tgz and copy in the ANDBOOT folder then locate the kernel of their choice here, the most recent is 2.6.32 although I recommend 2.6.25 which is in my signature if need USB mass storage in 2.6.32 doesn't work.
For the rest follow the installation guide in NAND is here and everything should go well.
Not be as it is done for HARET but here also the Guide to install in haret. I believe with what I said is more than enough so installed android in their device.
Best regards.

Josue_181 said:
Well try to be brief to that understand... (my English is very bad).
They must go to the thread of Fresh Froyo and go to this page, there download the ROM latest although I recommend the penultimate that is in my signature the most recent gave me problems.
ROM: Fresh Froyo 2010-12-03
Kernel: 2.6.25 10-31-10
The ROM download whith the name system-froyo-us-unodex-XX-XX-XX (X are date) have to rename it to androidinstall.tgz and copy in the ANDBOOT folder then locate the kernel of their choice here, the most recent is 2.6.32 although I recommend 2.6.25 which is in my signature if need USB mass storage in 2.6.32 doesn't work.
For the rest follow the installation guide in NAND is here and everything should go well.
Not be as it is done for HARET but here also the Guide to install in haret. I believe with what I said is more than enough so installed android in their device.
Best regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay I am pretty sure I understood what you said. I have the files you suggested thanks for the help I will try it tonight.

Josue_181 said:
the most recent is 2.6.32 although I recommend 2.6.25 which is in my signature if need USB mass storage in 2.6.32 doesn't work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It works in Ubuntu Linux. It does not work for Windows 7, at least that I could configure successfully.
I'm using SuperFroyo and the 2.6.32.9 Kernel and a few things I noticed to make it more stable: don't use a Task Killer and be sparing in your use of a cache cleaner. Seriously, a week of doing that has really helped things. Trust the Linux Kernel, it's not Windows. I also used Autostarts to prevent a few of the more eager apps from starting automatically post-boot, but that's optional.

Prowess said:
aceoyame,
How would it be possible to get the battery enhancements into the git? We need help!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I cannot as I do not have Clemsyn's kernel so I cannot commit his fixes for stability to git. As far as the git kernel goes it already has those fixes.
Also with fresh froyo or any AOSP build you will not have as much speed since it does not have all the Cyanogen Mod tweaks.

So it loses a lot of those tweaks but I can say 1 thing about cm6.1 and 7 so far, they are getting rather large themselves, I can look into cm7 for hero and find atleast 10 apks that just take up space or are only good once
aceoyame said:
I cannot as I do not have Clemsyn's kernel so I cannot commit his fixes for stability to git. As far as the git kernel goes it already has those fixes.
Also with fresh froyo or any AOSP build you will not have as much speed since it does not have all the Cyanogen Mod tweaks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my HTC Hero using XDA App

Yeah that is true, it's why I made a barebones.

goducks3620 said:
It works in Ubuntu Linux. It does not work for Windows 7, at least that I could configure successfully.
I'm using SuperFroyo and the 2.6.32.9 Kernel and a few things I noticed to make it more stable: don't use a Task Killer and be sparing in your use of a cache cleaner. Seriously, a week of doing that has really helped things. Trust the Linux Kernel, it's not Windows. I also used Autostarts to prevent a few of the more eager apps from starting automatically post-boot, but that's optional.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does seem contradictory as to not use a task killer, the task killer close applications that are open and if you don't use are accumulating and this put slow the phone, the APP autostarts manager if I heard but none that worked well in my Vogue, which do you use?
aceoyame said:
I cannot as I do not have Clemsyn's kernel so I cannot commit his fixes for stability to git. As far as the git kernel goes it already has those fixes.
Also with fresh froyo or any AOSP build you will not have as much speed since it does not have all the Cyanogen Mod tweaks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Using this kernel modified with atool I may obtained the benefits mentioned in the battery life?

aceoyame said:
Yeah that is true, it's why I made a barebones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
even with barebones, the cm settings along with the now statistic reporting and updater (which cause FC's if removed) are still pretty huge. i have grown to like cm7 on my hero but with having so much stuff commited to the project as much as i hate to say it, there is starting to be alot of ::gulp:: bloatware

Josue_181 said:
Does seem contradictory as to not use a task killer, the task killer close applications that are open and if you don't use are accumulating and this put slow the phone, the APP autostarts manager if I heard but none that worked well in my Vogue, which do you use?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't need a task killer. The newer versions of Android will shut down apps that aren't being used if the resources are needed elsewhere. If you run a Advanced Task Killer or something similar, it will use system resources shutting down apps that then re-open themselves, which the task killer will again kill. It drains the battery and makes the OS unstable. Uninstall your task killer for a few days and see if it helps.
I use Autostarts because it fixed a problem--the music player started randomly. I also use it to prevent some apps from starting up but it is probably not necessary.

CM7 on New Bootloader - Feasible?

Hi All
I am not really a developer at all but I have had loads of experience messing around with ROMs to improve them (such as changing rils manually, using my own updater scripts, creating my own nvflash layouts and images, etc).
Recently I have been trying out CM10.1 again (mivvs ROM) on the new bootloader and also paranoid android. But both are too buggy for me and the battery life is really bad. So I am thinking to revert back to CM7 again.
I am planning to *TRY* and build my own CM7 rom from source using these fixes by Pengus (http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=35661482&postcount=100) to try and make it boot and run on the new bootloader. I know the advantages are very little but its just a "to see if I can" thing. It will also mean others wanting to go back to CM7 won't have to flash the old bootloader again.
I am planning just a one-time build as CM7 has pretty much reached completion.
I am posting this up to:
Make sure no-one else has already done it
Make sure one of the devs doesn't know of a reason this 100% will fail
To see if anyone else would be interested in such a ROM
To know if its possible to build from Windows (if I need Linux then so be it)
Let me know what you think

hy
I have mivvs rom and the battery life in not bad.
however, your idea is interesting .. good job!

Well, I think this is quite interesting. However, I am a big fan of PA10 and Pengus work... for me they beat GB in all aspects at the moment. However, one of the greatest pro's of having a CM7 on the new bootloader is the ability to have dual boot with CM7 + CM10.1 (or something else), since dual boot only works for roms with the same bootloader.

So far I have:
Set up Ubuntu x64 VirtualPC
Installed Android SDK and all Dependancies
Sync'd the CyanogenMod 7 Source
Sorted out the P990 Proprietary libs
Made MOST of the changes Pengus lists (although some bits are in different files)
It turns out the kernel source isn't downloaded automatically with CM7 so I need to find out how to build the kernel from source (in order to make the rest of the changes on the list Pengus made) but I think its looking good..
CM7 also doesn't have fstab.p990 but these lines can be found in init.p990.rc. Until I have the kernel source I am stuck on point 6
And I didn't mean to knock Pengus/TonyP/Mivv's work. They have helped this phone come a really long way especially now acree seems to have dropped support for it.

Just FYI
I tried this, making all the changes above, compiled the build.... but it doesn't boot.
Just gets stuck on the red lg logo.
I think the old CM kernel will not run on the new boot loader at all.
Was worth a try!

rlees85 said:
Just FYI
I tried this, making all the changes above, compiled the build.... but it doesn't boot.
Just gets stuck on the red lg logo.
I think the old CM kernel will not run on the new boot loader at all.
Was worth a try!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe your last resort, try the excellent CM7 ETaNa kernel (link is in my signature).
But, I guess it won't work; kernels are bootloader specific.

Will Nexus 7 get kernel 3.10?

And if so, how much longer do you think? Have you seen any hints or rumors plastered on the net? Do you have any links to evidence of 3.10 coming? Are we missing out on anything of importance that 3.10 brings?
Does anyone know why we are still on 3.1, which was released in 2011? I thought Nexus devices got all the good stuff first... Or are only custom roms and kernels using 3.1?

Android devices rarely get new kernel versions anyway since the kernels tend to be customized to work with a specific device, and the binary drivers are built for a specific version of the kernel. This is not as bad as it sounds tho, since a lot of stuff can be backported meaning you get functionality from a newer kernel without the actual kernel version changing. Even more common with custom kernels. For example there's ROMs for our device that uses the F2FS file system which first appeared in the 3.8 kernel and gotten big changes every version after that, and it runs just fine backported to the 3.1 kernel.

hencke said:
Android devices rarely get new kernel versions anyway since the kernels tend to be customized to work with a specific device, and the binary drivers are built for a specific version of the kernel. This is not as bad as it sounds tho, since a lot of stuff can be backported meaning you get functionality from a newer kernel without the actual kernel version changing. Even more common with custom kernels. For example there's ROMs for our device that uses the F2FS file system which first appeared in the 3.8 kernel and gotten big changes every version after that, and it runs just fine backported to the 3.1 kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, so this quote here from Linux.com about commits that look like they are made for Nexus 7 2012, is just wishful thinking? I hope not because 3.10 is a massive jump in technology, and possibly even in performance for our device.
there are architecture-specific commits for 3.10 in the kernel/tegra project, which points to development for the 2012 Nexus 7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.linux.com/news/embedded-...roid-will-be-updated-to-the-v310-linux-kernel
EDIT: Ok, I see now, so many new things from 3.4 and 3.8 may already be in our 3.1 custom kernels? If Google releases a 3.10 for the N7 I hope our devs take advantage of it, instead of porting things over to 3.1. I'd like to see our device get Android 5.0 and kernel 3.10, that would really make me feel like this was one of the best investments I have ever made.

As I said, lots of the improvements from newer kernels have already been backported so there wouldn't be as big a difference in performance as you might think. The tegra commits are interesting, but sadly does not confirm anything. For example, the android police article on those same commits mentions that screenshots from the nexus 4 and 5 with the new android version still show them on kernel 3.4. The chance that the 2012 nexus 7 would get a kernel update while the nexus 5 seems awefully slim. I hope I'm wrong tho, since I think it would make things simpler for the custom kernel developers to base stuff on a newer kernel but I wouldn't get my hopes up...

hencke said:
As I said, lots of the improvements from newer kernels have already been backported so there wouldn't be as big a difference in performance as you might think. The tegra commits are interesting, but sadly does not confirm anything. For example, the android police article on those same commits mentions that screenshots from the nexus 4 and 5 with the new android version still show them on kernel 3.4. The chance that the 2012 nexus 7 would get a kernel update while the nexus 5 seems awefully slim. I hope I'm wrong tho, since I think it would make things simpler for the custom kernel developers to base stuff on a newer kernel but I wouldn't get my hopes up...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, thanks for making it a little more clearer to me. I kept thinking our 3.1 kernel from 2011 was holding us back from getting one last great update. I think features are no longer needed and I just want them to push performance as far as this thing can be taken. So with ART and F2FS finally coming, I was hoping a better kernel would grace us as well. lol, but it looks like a newer kernel wouldn't do much that the devs haven't already done.
Thanks buddy for jumping in and clearing some of that up for me. :good:

Nvidia released their kernel 3.4.35 for tegra3

[Kernel] Shield Portable Kernel Development [Incl. Guide]

Welcome to the first custom kernel for the KitKat Shield.​
This thread is for the development and building of the Shield Portable kernel.
This is not intended to download a build, post issues, and return when fixed.
Kernel Source:
https://github.com/StarKissed/starkissed-kernel-roth
Kernel Downloads:
https://goo.im/devs/playground/shieldroth
The kernel can be built using the commands below or the included script.
Code:
make tegra11_android_defconfig -j$CPU_JOB_NUM ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=$TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX
make tegra114-roth.dtb -j$CPU_JOB_NUM ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=$TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX
make -j$CPU_JOB_NUM ARCH=arm CROSS_COMPILE=$TOOLCHAIN_PREFIX
App & Donations:
StarKissed [SKU] on Google Play allows you to configure many of the options provided by this kernel. Issues or comments about the app can be posted at the XDA StarKissed app thread
Donations are not being collected through the forum. If you would like to donate, you may do so through StarKissed [SKU] on Google Play by using the donate options located in the top right (the green dollar bill guy).

[Kernel] Shield Kernel Development
The included ramdisk is for update 98. If you are on 72, this will most likely result in a bootloop. Using the 72 ramdisk will not work with this kernel, as the source is specific to "OTA 5" according to the Nvidia gitweb.

I recently updated the source and changed a few commands that may explain why current source resulted in non-working builds. I will be testing builds soon and then begin modifying the kernel once the core build is verified working.

Nice, I hope there will also be an overclocked kernel for 4.4. I know it's silly but I miss the 4.3 overclocked kernel.

rylen said:
Nice, I hope there will also be an overclocked kernel for 4.4. I know it's silly but I miss the 4.3 overclocked kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All the code is there, it just loops. I'm not sure what's going on with it. The shield tablet version works.

Quick question. Any chance you could update the usb ethernet drivers in this? Specifically, I'm suffering from this bug on an ASIX 88772 on the official kernel, and it seems their driver is rather out of date. Thanks, and keep up the good work!

bakageta said:
Quick question. Any chance you could update the usb ethernet drivers in this? Specifically, I'm suffering from this bug on an ASIX 88772 on the official kernel, and it seems their driver is rather out of date. Thanks, and keep up the good work!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Won't do much good until it boots

True enough, just thought I'd bring it up since it's a fairly easy fix. In the meantime, I threw together a stock kernel with an updated driver to get by. I had one problem after another with the latest official driver, but the good folks at LKML had already put some work in on v4.1.0 several years ago. Using drivers/net/usb/asix.c and usbnet.c from the 3.4.106 source built without problems.

Beginning to think I may have to settle for building against the full source on this one. It boots fine when doing that, but not built alone. The shield tablet builds fine alone, so there's no explanation for it.

you are going to make a new build of your kernel? if you need help with the tests i can help.

YamazakiRobert said:
you are going to make a new build of your kernel? if you need help with the tests i can help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Things are a bit crazy, but once I can get all of the changes fixed up and it'll build clean, I'm going to try to run it over night.

Slightly off-topic, but I'll ask you since you're the only other person I know building a shield kernel. I built nvidia's kernel, changing only the two drivers associated with my ethernet, but for some reason console mode has stopped working now. Have you ran into a similar problem? Plugging HDMI in pops up the selector, but clicking on console mode doesn't do anything - it just stays on the selector screen.

bakageta said:
Slightly off-topic, but I'll ask you since you're the only other person I know building a shield kernel. I built nvidia's kernel, changing only the two drivers associated with my ethernet, but for some reason console mode has stopped working now. Have you ran into a similar problem? Plugging HDMI in pops up the selector, but clicking on console mode doesn't do anything - it just stays on the selector screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It shouldn't be related. You may need to check the proprietary drivers. I believe HDMI is one.

Didn't bother to find out what the problem was, it just stuck around because I was doing dirty builds as I tested. Once I got a few other tweaks and had some time, I did a clean build and it resolved itself. Did you manage to get your kernel booting when building it by itself? I'm sure I'm doing something wrong there too, but I've been grudgingly building the entire device, since that at least works reliably.

What is so special about this kernel compared to stock ? goodjob already btw, you're one of the few who actually have a kernel
It's really sad how not much development is going on, it's such a good device there is only like 1 release at the original section :/