[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] AndreiLux:
I have been seeing you post these posts all over the kernel threads, but now that you've started to post them even here in Siyah it's time to debunk your pile of nonsense because you're a sting in me eye as far as your so supposed contributions to the community are concerned.

First of all it's completely useless to start comparing benchmarks between kernels without a proper test configuration even for all kernels, so basically most of the time what you are benchmarking there isn't even the difference between the kernels but the difference between the default governors attached and running for each kernel. You can basically just take Siyah for example and run the same benchmarks for all different governors and you will end up with the same performance discrepancies.

If you want to compare performance between the default settings of different kernels, then I sure hope you are taking it to heart and doing at least 20 quadrant runs and taking the average of that; it's completely too volatile to start using as a reasonable benchmarking tool. NenaMark again is fine, even though you see that there's some kernels which differ in performance purely due to configurations, and I don't know what is wrong with your build, but stock kernels nor Phenomenal should benchmark in the low frequency state for NenaMark. I really do hope all those results are on the same ROM else Vellamo too is useless as it benchmarks the Webkit engine of the phone.

Now that's all peanuts until now, what really bothers me is your way of benchmarking battery life which is just asinine.

You tell me your normal testbed includes GTalk and Skype and a bunch of other stuff. If any of those are not using C2DM for data communications then your whole benchmarking is useless. And as a matter of fact, Skype works on a peer-to-peer network protocol and every time anyone on your contact list does anything then you are getting sent data packets which will wake up the phone and drain battery. You can not do that and claim that these tests are supposed to be accurate. You are posting nothing in regards of any kind of wakelocks, you are posting nothing in regards to screen utilization. You simply cannot start comparing screen on time between daily uses on different days without having some sort of static image in the background of a pre-defined average brightness for all tests.

Your normalization attempt is cute but it does nothing at all, you can just look at your screen on % vs awake %, those vary all around, and it's not the fault of the kernel. Deep sleep time has nothing to do with the kernel, it's all ROM and application based.

I don't condone you trying to help out here by posting these things, but other people who aren't as well informed are taking your results to heart and trust you when doing the decision on choosing a kernel on the basis that you know what you are doing. You've been posting these benchmarks for weeks in the threads of all of those kernels and people are blindly following the results as some kind of facts. You are not doing anybody any favour at all. If you wish to share your testing do it please in a thread of your own; I know you said that maintaining a thread would be too much work for you, if that's the case, then just please stop.