FORUMS
Remove All Ads from XDA

[KERNEL] [GPL] [GN] franco.Kernel r398

21,922 posts
Thanks Meter: 119,229
 
Post Reply Email Thread
31st January 2012, 07:41 PM |#5001  
psycho2097's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Raleigh
Thanks Meter: 157
 
Donate to Me
More
Whoa! 5000th post!!!!


Quote:
Originally Posted by franciscofranco

It's ok, I did some **** in the init.d script. It's now fixed in 15.1. It will always boot up as 1000mhz unless people set another governor and freq + set on boot.

always doing crazy ****, you are. Strong, with you, the force is. bring on 15.1, please do.
 
 
31st January 2012, 07:53 PM |#5002  
AdrianE46's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Bucharest
Thanks Meter: 78
 
More
Seems to be working rather nicely, but i do have one small bug to report. When i pull the notification area down it says @@ instead of the carrier name on the bottom. Running aokp 20 and franco 15.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
31st January 2012, 08:14 PM |#5003  
Member
Thanks Meter: 1
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcLandis

Do you have this behavior when you don't UV?

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyz71

So far this kernel is awesome.



Sent from my pimped out galaxy nexus.

Whit UV? If yes pleas write data.
31st January 2012, 08:15 PM |#5004  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 32
 
More
I decided to take some time today to try to optimize my voltages...

I thought a good starting point would be the stock voltages. It turns out that the stock voltages are scaled almost perfectly linearly with frequency. Great, that means it is easy to extrapolate what stock voltage would be for 1000 MHz and 1350 MHz, 1324 mV and 1477 mV.

Here's a chart showing stock voltages (including my extrapolated values), some other "standard" voltages, and then some recommendations based on reducing stock voltages by the same percentage:
Code:
               350  700  920  1000 1200 1350

        Stock  1025 1203 1317 1324 1388 1477
       Franco   900 1000      1100 1200 1300
         Apex   850  975 1050      1175 1225
~83% of Stock   850 1000      1100 1150 1225
~81% of Stock   825  975      1075 1125 1200
I think pretty much everyone should be able to run 83% of stock and have it be completely stable. It matches up very well with the default voltages in the Apex kernel, and the middle frequencies, 700 and 1000, match up perfectly with the default voltages in the Franco kernel. I think it makes a lot of sense to scale down each voltage by the same percentage.

Personally, I'm running the ~81% of stock values.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to aron7awol For This Useful Post: [ View ] Gift aron7awol Ad-Free
31st January 2012, 08:22 PM |#5005  
franciscofranco's Avatar
OP Recognized Developer
Flag Parede, Lisboa
Thanks Meter: 119,229
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by aron7awol

I decided to take some time today to try to optimize my voltages...

I thought a good starting point would be the stock voltages. It turns out that the stock voltages are scaled almost perfectly linearly with frequency. Great, that means it is easy to extrapolate what stock voltage would be for 1000 MHz and 1350 MHz, 1324 mV and 1477 mV.

Here's a chart showing stock voltages (including my extrapolated values), some other "standard" voltages, and then some recommendations based on reducing stock voltages by the same percentage:

Code:
               300  700  920 1000 1200 1350

        Stock  1025 1203 1317 1324 1388 1477
       Franco   900 1000      1100 1200 1300
         Apex   850  975 1050      1175 1225
~83% of Stock   850 1000      1100 1150 1225
~81% of Stock   825  975      1075 1125 1200
I think pretty much everyone should be able to run 83% of stock and have it be completely stable. It matches up very well with the default voltages in the Apex kernel, and the middle frequencies, 700 and 1000, match up perfectly with the default voltages in the Franco kernel. I think it makes a lot of sense to scale each voltage by the same percentage.

Personally, I'm running the ~81% of stock values.

Thanks for taking the time to do that.

In 15.1 I increased 1000mhz voltage to 1150 for stability purposes. This is what I've wrote in my commit:

Since we were already undervolting it from factory settings for the
920mhz slot, running the same voltage for the increased frequency will
most likely cause stability issues, so we increase it by 50mV which
won't impact the battery life at all as the device spends more time at
700mhz than the rest of the frequencies all together.
31st January 2012, 08:23 PM |#5006  
aleve1983's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Viterbo
Thanks Meter: 20
 
Donate to Me
More
Franco When you lower the notification bar You can see at the bottom of the screen becomes brighter. So it s possible increase the display brightness!
Inviato dal mio Galaxy Nexus usando Tapatalk
31st January 2012, 08:24 PM |#5007  
Member
Flag Stockholm
Thanks Meter: 18
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by aron7awol

I decided to take some time today to try to optimize my voltages...

I thought a good starting point would be the stock voltages. It turns out that the stock voltages are scaled almost perfectly linearly with frequency. Great, that means it is easy to extrapolate what stock voltage would be for 1000 MHz and 1350 MHz, 1324 mV and 1477 mV.

Here's a chart showing stock voltages (including my extrapolated values), some other "standard" voltages, and then some recommendations based on reducing stock voltages by the same percentage:

Code:
               300  700  920 1000 1200 1350

        Stock  1025 1203 1317 1324 1388 1477
       Franco   900 1000      1100 1200 1300
         Apex   850  975 1050      1175 1225
~83% of Stock   850 1000      1100 1150 1225
~81% of Stock   825  975      1075 1125 1200
I think pretty much everyone should be able to run 83% of stock and have it be completely stable. It matches up very well with the default voltages in the Apex kernel, and the middle frequencies, 700 and 1000, match up perfectly with the default voltages in the Franco kernel. I think it makes a lot of sense to scale down each voltage by the same percentage.

Personally, I'm running the ~81% of stock values.

Assuming "300" is a typo and you mean 350?

// Stefan
31st January 2012, 08:26 PM |#5008  
Senior Member
Gothenburg
Thanks Meter: 27
 
More
UPDATE: Just wanted to give an update to say that I'm still on AOKP milestone 3 with franco 15 and tried the site again before flashing to bigxie's apex tom and it's buttery smooth.. It seems to be fluctuating. Low memory issues? Doesn't seem right.


Quote:
Originally Posted by franciscofranco

What do you mean with badly? There isn't a single user with that problem, so it's something at your end =/

If I could make a recording of it I would, but it's just generally laggy, unresponsive/choppy when zooming, really sluggish (i.e. i pull my finger to pan around the website and it pans ~1.5-2 sec after). Only on that site too, afaik. I haven't come across a more meatier site yet.

I realize it must be something on my end, I just don't know what. I don't really know what else to 'do' before reflashing a rom other than doing full wipe (data/dalvik/cache). Maybe I should try wiping /sdcard as well?

Anyway, I didn't want to make it seem like it was a problem with your kernel per se, I just wanted confirmation from someone else that the site indeed works fine on a GNex with your kernel so no hard feelings! I have no doubts in your kernel at all, but now that I know the site DOES work (and HAS worked for me before, flawlessly) it's got to be something on my end. I'm going to reflash to another rom and keep testing.

Thanks again for a great kernel and updater app, and most importantly get better!

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho2097

@eddieN try bigxie's apex rom.

Will do!
31st January 2012, 08:40 PM |#5009  
Senior Member
Thanks Meter: 32
 
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by stesmi

Assuming "300" is a typo and you mean 350?

// Stefan

Yes, thanks, I fixed it.

---------- Post added at 03:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:32 PM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by franciscofranco

Thanks for taking the time to do that.

In 15.1 I increased 1000mhz voltage to 1150 for stability purposes. This is what I've wrote in my commit:

Since we were already undervolting it from factory settings for the
920mhz slot, running the same voltage for the increased frequency will
most likely cause stability issues, so we increase it by 50mV which
won't impact the battery life at all as the device spends more time at
700mhz than the rest of the frequencies all together.

I see, thanks for the update on the current voltage status in 15.1...

Maybe you want to tweak your voltages slightly to make them scale more linearly like the stock voltages do? Take a look at the ~85% values below:
Code:
               350  700  920  1000 1200 1350

        Stock  1025 1203 1317 1324 1388 1477
  Franco 15.1   900 1000      1150 1200 1300
~87% of Stock   900 1050      1150 1200 1275
~85% of Stock   875 1025      1125 1175 1250
~83% of Stock   850 1000      1100 1150 1225
~81% of Stock   825  975      1075 1125 1200
Those ~85% values match up well with where your voltages are at now, but they also scale linearly like the stock voltages. What do you think?

Edit: Added ~87% values, which match up even better.
31st January 2012, 08:48 PM |#5010  
franciscofranco's Avatar
OP Recognized Developer
Flag Parede, Lisboa
Thanks Meter: 119,229
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by aron7awol

Yes, thanks, I fixed it.

---------- Post added at 03:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:32 PM ----------



I see, thanks for the update on the current voltage status in 15.1...

Maybe you want to tweak your voltages slightly to make them scale more linearly like the stock voltages do? Take a look at the ~85% values below:

Code:
               350  700  920 1000 1200 1350

        Stock  1025 1203 1317 1324 1388 1477
  Franco 15.1   900 1000      1150 1200 1300
~87% of Stock   900 1050      1150 1200 1275
~85% of Stock   875 1025      1125 1175 1250
~83% of Stock   850 1000      1100 1150 1225
~81% of Stock   825  975      1075 1125 1200
Those ~85% values match up well with where your voltages are at now, but they also scale linearly like the stock voltages. What do you think?

Edit: Added ~87% values, which match up even better.

I think that's a reasonable suggestion. Will do.
31st January 2012, 08:49 PM |#5011  
psycho2097's Avatar
Senior Member
Flag Raleigh
Thanks Meter: 157
 
Donate to Me
More
Quote:
Originally Posted by franciscofranco

Yes, that's how I always flash it since I already have the sdcard bin etc on system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieN

If I could make a recording of it I would, but it's just generally laggy, unresponsive/choppy when zooming, really sluggish (i.e. i pull my finger to pan around the website and it pans ~1.5-2 sec after). Only on that site too, afaik. I haven't come across a more meatier site yet.

I realize it must be something on my end, I just don't know what. I don't really know what else to 'do' before reflashing a rom other than doing full wipe (data/dalvik/cache). Maybe I should try wiping /sdcard as well?

Anyway, I didn't want to make it seem like it was a problem with your kernel per se, I just wanted confirmation from someone else that the site indeed works fine on a GNex with your kernel so no hard feelings! I have no doubts in your kernel at all, but now that I know the site DOES work (and HAS worked for me before, flawlessly) it's got to be something on my end. I'm going to reflash to another rom and keep testing.

Thanks again for a great kernel and updater app, and most importantly get better!



Will do!

Just for the heck of it, try fixing permissions in CWM. Doesnt hurt. plus delet init.d folder, clear cahe, dalvik and flash imo1.7.4. juz try.
Post Reply Subscribe to Thread

Tags
4.0.4, 4.1, 4.2, best kernel, best support, fast, franco, galaxy, jb 4.1, kernel, nexus, samsung

Guest Quick Reply (no urls or BBcode)
Message:
Previous Thread Next Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes