yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] knzo:
Entropy512, with all due respect, you're an idiot.

You keep shooting blanks because you still haven't grasped anything have you? Lionheart was made without resorting to anything found on siyah, neak, your kernel or netarchy or whatever he's called. I didn't lie in anything I said, now once again, get your head out of your ass and move along buddy, move along. (By the way, remember the saying: "pensa ladrão que todos são de sua condição"?, you're projecting that on me when thinking I deleted the comments to hide something, hilariously pathetic).

As for the rest, I agree with franciscofranco, I've been in many communities (LG P500, LG P970, SE Arc, SE Ray, HTC IncS) and I've never had developers crying their eyes out and making a fuss or 1*-star fanboys rating wave like I had here. Honestly, the word "disgusting" francisco used pretty sums it all up. Thankfully, the users keep me engaged.

And yes, reply to this with more pseudo-facts and delusions that attempt to discredit me. Your inflamed ego and e-penis factor will force you to do so. For me I'm done.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] Entropy512:
You claim that you didn't lie in anything you said, but the whole post that started this is, as I have stated, a blatant lie.

Regardless of where your code came from, in this post http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?p=21761755&highlight=lionheartx#post21761755 you claim that no other kernel has the features of lionheart - but the code analysis above proves that this is a complete false and blatant lie. SiyahKernel has the same capabilities, NEAK does, so does mine. 99% of the benefit of "lionheart" comes from reducing the polling interval of the governor, and I have already stated the dates in which this feature was added to other kernels. Yet you had the balls to claim TODAY that Lionheart was unique and offered something no other kernel had. You prey on the gullibility of users and their prone-ness to placebo effect to deceive them into thinking your code does something it does not.

If anyone is an idiot, it is you - it is clear from your previous comments that you don't even remotely understand what the patches you threw into your kernel do.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] :
Right if i can give my 2 cents after reading your bashing to one another. Firstly flaming each other in a public thread is something you expect from n00bs and not developers. So if you have something to say do it in private. If you think there is kang going on here and no credits are given and the developer is fooling the xda users on here report him to the mods and the committee that is what they are here for also. Report it to a mod get the thread closed down till mods do there job and let them decide from evidence given from both parties and then the forum administrator or moderator can decide if this is a kang or not.

I know this is not my position to say anything but i find it pathetic that the whole argument of flaming and trolling on the threads are about n00bs but here we are having devs doing it instead rather than doing the decent thing and doing it in private.

So discussions in private and report this to the mods so they can do their job. Easy stuff really...And that way if Knzo is found in the wrong here then mods can ban his ass of xda and not let him release anything else here. this can be a message to everyone else out there not to bloody kang others people work and actually give credit were credit is suppose to be and given. That is me said what i had to say apologies to everyone but its pretty sad to read all this really
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] BrandoHD:
With all due respect, you need to work on your approach and your tone, I have seen you in multiple threads diss developers and attack them and their work when it is not really needed (where is the spirit there?), I am sure there are many mediums whereby you can go about and do your Sherrif work and not have it end up like how this last case with Knzo has gotten to, I understand the passion to keep things on a a particular level, but your approach is not constructive at all.

Sometimes it's not what you say, but how you say it
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] mbutandola:
Tell me guys! Why don't others get the flame? I'm still to see the "so called" developers that kanged the Hyperdroid team work get the hair dryer. Some on here did worse. You guys were even tricked to give them the "recognised developer" status until it got removed without making noise.

I mean, isn't there some kind of code so that you could sort this out with dignity?

All this could have been dealt with in private, asking the guy to change the header or whatever (if he really has to) and keeping the accusations private.

Anyway, if the the guy is a kanger then he's a pretty good one because there are not many kernels on here that have made my phone feel so smooth. And I've tried many of them. If it's placebo then it's a pretty good one.

On the other hand, we are dealing with kernels here. I need to have confidence in the dev.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] JmPTaz09:
Flashed the at&t version, all runs well and smooth, but the soft buttons aren't functioning properly (search and back button aren't working, home is acting like back, menu works). Will test again once u get that sorted, thanks for releasing an at&t version!
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] Entropy512:
I'm sorry, but I have no tolerance whatsoever for those who blatantly attempt to deceive their users, as knzo did this morning. Bad code is one thing, I usually just ignore it, but when he went so far as to disrespect multiple other kernel developers in that post (Simone201 and gokhanmoral at the very least) - that was going too far. That was the turning point, and something like that cannot be dealt with privately. Frauds must be exposed for what they are, in public - otherwise the public will continue to believe they are a fraud, and Lionheart IS a fraud. Knzo STILL maintains it offers capabilities no other kernels support, when it's clear that it doesn't.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] knzo:
/facepalm

Ok, just one last time okay?

This is what they call "lionheart" tweaks: https://github.com/simone201/neak-kernel-sgs2/blob/master/initramfs/sbin/near/lionheart.sh

Now that you saw what I changed on lionheart (based on update3 conservative), tell me, what this script does is the same as I did? Now let's look again on what I said:

"Lionheart goes much more than tuning a simple options in Conservative and "Lionheart tweaks" won't make it the same as Lionheart unless the Conservative is exactly the same (which is not in update3 or any other kernel using "Lionheart tweaks").

In comparison with Update3, it has the latest AOSP patches, it has some tweaks from morfic, arighi and my own. Then, and only then I've changed the tunables such as thresholds.

"

See the thing on the bold? Tell me, did I lie?...

See the thing between ( )? Is it a lie? Go check for yourself. It isn't. Hell, put back the commented code and change the names back to conservative and do a md5 if you must.

Now let's look on the underline text. I said latest AOSP patches, did I lie? I said morfic tweaks, I even pasted you the link before. Did I lie? And the arighi tweaks which is the early behaviour for ondemand "ported" to conservative. Did I lie? And changing tunables like the threshold. Again, did I lie?

Trust me when I tell you you're shooting blanks and embarassing yourself. I tried to stop this even before replying to you even though you were attempting to discredit me by accusing I stole from netarchy or neak (which turns out to be code I didn't even know about and isn't even on my source). From the very beginning, you're being disrespectful to me and you're awfully biased and blind that you can't even read what people are telling you. Will you stop this now?
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] :
Fair enough you made your point and you have nothing but valid points here that you made my friend. Now the right thing to do would it not be getting one of the moderators to close this thread and investigate the matter? And if people want to know the reason then just put it on first and last post in big letters and font for everyone to see. And that way other kangers can realize that if you are going to kang at least give credits were suppose to be given and not come across that you do all the work. And not only they can see that someone has not only been banned but has his reputation in tatters cause of his mistakes. That way kangers will think twice before they go ahead and do something like that. I am not saying Knzo is or is not i do not know the story and i really do not care..But a message needs to be send and done the proper way. And if this is the case here then so be it

And most of all there should be respect here on xda as you said and between developers and us as well the normal users who use each devs releases....And you are right the public does need to know if someones work is a kang. That way at least as the previous poster said..We need to have confidence in the developer of the rom /kernel we use. Cause if we do not then something wrong is going on here.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] BrandoHD:
I understand and let me be the first to say, what you do is needed to keep the kanging and the negative stuff limited, but when I see Entropy512 username as I scroll down reading posts, I have this feeling that a war is about to begin, all I am saying is that maybe a bit more subtly is needed, especially out in the open like this, I am sure you can do all the necessary exposing and achieve the needed results while being more subtle

And maybe some protocol should be enforced involving moderators/locking a thread, while the issues are worked out to keep the dev to dev flaming at a minimum while still getting to the bottom line of the issues....

Because I think dev to dev flaming is as low as we can go....
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] :
Exactly what i have been trying to say above
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] androidkid311:
Soooo.......*looks about* is this kernel any good guys? When the GS2 becomes heavily outdated u lot will look back at this and feel silly lol.

looks like an iphone but powered by android baby!!!!
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] knzo:
I'll look into that.

I may PM you soon to test drive a fix.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] snout:
Running with 1.4 for now !

ABSOLUTELY FRIGGING AWESOME !

Never as such a kernel been as smooth as this, Void was Great ! BUT

This just gets better and better.:D

And i have TRIED THEM ALL ! GO FIGURE !

GREAT WORK KNZO !
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] BrandoHD:
Any update to the issue on the issue tracker, is there anything I can do on my side?
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] HeavenlyWinds:
Why dont we just share codes and hold hands while singing to some Bob jovi and dancing naked in Franco's garden.

Peace.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] HotlipsH:
Who ever made the code, awesome... No kernel before this has behaved this good on my phone. Regardless of it's origin someone have done good work here. Hat off to ALL involved :)
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] JmPTaz09:
That is what truly matters, how the kernel runs on your phone. I am a musician; this is like music to me. There are many notes and chords out there, that were invented by someone long ago. Many people use the same notes and chords, and construct them in slightly different patterns. They then name it and credit it as their work. Even if it's only a slight variation in notes or chord patterns, the artist names it and releases their work to the public. Some artists will claim that they used that chord structure/pattern, rhythm, beat, etc.; always happens. The reality is, it's all been used and copied and shared many times in the past, and none of them invented the notes and chords. If a kernel dev wants to call his arrangement of code (chords) a certain name, then who cares. The end user will decide if they like the previous renditions or this persons arrangement, just as they will pick their favorite bands. He had given credit to multiple devs and I don't think he was really trying to take too much credit (he was just writing good things about his own kernel, why wouldn't you do such a thing?). If he simply forgot to credit/thank someone, simply asking him to do so would have been better than what has transpired.

Who cares if Chevelle got their initial influence/style/structure from Tool, they're still a great ****ing band!
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] Entropy512:
That script changes the conservative governor sampling interval to the lowest possible offered by the kernel (Edit: well, nearly so - if a kernel's minimum of 25000, the script will set it to 50000). In SiyahKernel, NEAK, and my own kernel, reduction of this minimum is implemented by netarchy's patch from August 17, or a derivative of it. Also, this is nothing you can't do just by reducing the sampling_rate parameter in the Advanced tab of SetCPU.

"Lionheart" also reduces the minimum conservative governor sampling interval to 10000 microseconds, in a hardcoded manner that doesn't respect minimums calculated from the CPU transition latency.

These are the EXACT SAME THING. Except that you are the only one who saw fit to relabel this change as an entire new governor. You are the only one who still insists that you are doing something unique and special and insist that no other kernel does what you do - you aren't doing anything special, and this feature is not unique.

All of the other changes to the governor are minor code cleanups, that have little to no significant effect on performance. 99% of the benefit of "lionheart" is the ability to reduce sampling_rate below 100000 microseconds. (Calling it rate is a bit of a misnomer - it's actually a sampling interval.)

As an example of the difference this makes:

In a default conservative governor, it takes 0.4 seconds minimum to ramp from 200 MHz to 1200 MHz (4 steps, 0.1 seconds per step)

In netarchy's original implementation (sampling_rate_min reduced to 25000 microseconds), this is reduced to 0.1 seconds total, 1/4 of the time of an untweaked governor.

In SiyahKernel and "lionheart", sampling_rate_min is reduced to 10000 microseconds, meaning that the governor can ramp from 200 MHz to 1200 MHz in 0.04 seconds in theory. In practice, you are so close to the CPU's transition latency that the actual time is going to be higher - Also, at this point the CPU is going to be spending a significant percentage of time changing states instead of doing work. Its load estimates are going to become "noisy", leading to many unnecessary transitions.

Yes, you have other code changes in there (upstream cleanups, and one tweak from gokhanmoral), but in terms of their real effect, they are insignificant compared to reducing the sampling_rate parameter of the governor, and claiming otherwise is fraudulently misleading users.

And what "AOSP" changes do you have? Google has not, in any situation I am aware of, made any changes to the conservative governor. Edit: And if they have, they are clearly not in your source code.

Also, what is your justification for removing every single comment from the conservative governor? As I've stated before, this achieves nothing except for hiding the true origins of your code, by artificially inflating the size of any diff that might be generated by a reviewer.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] knzo:
Basically, you're reducing about 8 changes to 1 because only that one matters for you. So in your perspective, as long as that one thing is there, the rest is basically the same.

I accept that point of view and even though I find it arguable and will test it to see if the other tweaks and patches affect performance, your tone and attempt to discredit or project me as mischievous is unacceptable and childish. I told you to stop making this fuss and even resume it by PM if you wished so, other people asked you the same, and yet you keep going like a rabid dog. Will all due respect, you've been now added to my ignore list.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] Entropy512:
After getting out of the shower, I realize that you don't seem to understand what some of the code in the governor does, and you don't know what the effects of altering it were, so I'm going to go through the critical parts of it line-by-line. (Note, I consider lines broken up by whitespace for readability to be a single "line")

min_sampling_rate =
MIN_SAMPLING_RATE_RATIO * jiffies_to_usecs(10);

With the original value of MIN_SAMPLING_RATE_RATIO (2), this translates to:

2 * jiffies_to_usecs(10)

Note that jiffies is unit of time internal to the Linux kernel. The actual length of a jiffy varies from architecture to architecture, but on both Hummingbird and Exynos it seems to be 5000 microseconds. So in a default kernel:

min_sampling_rate = 2 * 5000 * 10 = 100000

Netarchy's patch reduces this to:

1 * 5000 * 5 = 25000

SiyahKernel takes this farther and reduces this to:

1 * 5000 * 1 = 5000

(A bit of a lack-of-understanding mistake here, but not one that is dangerous, we'll get to this next.)

You removed this line and replaced it with a hardcoded value.

The next line:

min_sampling_rate = max(min_sampling_rate,
MIN_LATENCY_MULTIPLIER * latency);

This ensures that min_sampling_rate is not lower than a value the hardware supports.

You removed this line (a safety check) and replaced it with... nothing. In the process of applying a patch from a different hardware architecture to Exynos, you got lucky that it didn't blow up in your face. This line is there for a reason.

Next line:

dbs_tuners_ins.sampling_rate =
max(min_sampling_rate,
latency * LATENCY_MULTIPLIER);

This sets the default sampling rate to a value dependent on the hardware's CPU transition latency. You removed this and replaced it with a hardcoded value.

The actual effect of doing what you did on an end user is nothing if they use a script such as the one described above, or a utility like SetCPU, in order to change the sampling_rate.

A kernel should use a "sane" default for this value, and the original code ensures one. Your hardcoded value - not so sane.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] :
Hi knzo,

First off I would like to say thanks for your development and your activity in your thread. I see many developers who make amazing releases but do not contribute to their thread by answering questions and commenting at all. So thanks!

Anyway, I have CriskeloROM installed on my phone along with SpeedMod v18 (on my i9100). I was wondering what I could expect from your kernel in terms of battery life WITHOUT touching any CPU/GPU clock settings as I do not mess with that kind of stuff. What about the overall snappiness of the phone?
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] knzo:
Well, battery is always a tricky pony as it always depends on the type of usage.

I have a pretty good standby battery consumption and overall snappy feel but I fear that the battery consumption under heavy usage isn't still where I'd like it to be.

My advice is, try it. You can always go back if you find it lacking - thankfully you're in a community where you have many choices to pick from.

P.S. AT&T devices are having a bug regarding the keys assignments. This is already fixed and will be released in the next version.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] lsv-1:
+ 1
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] snout:
@ Entropy512 - FFS - DO YOUR DIRTY WASHING IN PRIVATE !

WE THE END USERS LOVE THIS KERNEL ! I PERSONALLY DON'T CARE ONE FLYING F--K WERE IT COMES FROM OR HOW ITS MADE - IT WORKS GREAT FOR ME !

IT WILL EVOLVE JUST LIKE ALL OTHER KERNELS AND IF IT MEANS STEALING IT FROM THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND - SO BE IT ! OPEN SOURCE YEAH !
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] HotlipsH:
And here I thought the Apple/Samsung-situation was comical. At least they are bickering about something substantial like if edgebounce is unique.

At the end of the day I much rather see both of you write code and make my phone better rater then spend quality time making a cyber-interpetation of Catch 22.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] danieldmm:
Na minha terra chama-se "Dor de cotovelo" :)

Keep the good work, your kernel it's getting very good, I was in Siyan Kernel, with yours the past 2 days, no issues so far.

Cheers

Escrito pelo meu querido Galaxy S2 using tapatalk...
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] i04055:
In my end user experience... I like this kernel performance the best...

Even 2 different chef with same receipt, cannot produce exactly the same taste....
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] acolwill:
So if and when the kernel makes your phone explode, you'll stand by knzo screaming from your keyboard saying it's the best thing since the iPhone 3Gs?

I admire your vehement sense of loyalty, it's apparent you don't understand the real issue. The kernel is potentially dangerous. So called changes to the conservative (note, that means lower performance in preference to longer life) governor, to make it 'faster' or 'snappier' means you may as well use the default i.e. Interactive. Any real programmer will tell you that hard coding in values and removing source comments is BAD.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] gokhanmoral:
this is a development thread and the discussion is very well related with development, maybe not the development itself directly but it is related with the methods and ethics.

I am reading the discussion and I would like to see such discussions in the original thread instead of reading the responses in other threads.

so, if you love this kernel use it. this discussion won't prevent you using it.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] snout:
:eek:

I think the attitude of some of the responses are TOTALLY uncalled for !

And it is disrespectful to ANY DEV when this occurs !

SHOW SOME RESPECT !

Use private chat / PMs

Back on Topic - testing out Wheatley now - early days, so lets see how it goes.
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] Reflxxx:
Void vs Phoenix

I like your new idea but I also liked the old one where void was all about minimalism. Now that its Phoenix it increased 0,7 MB in size immediately (I remember u once said "A small kernel is a good one").

How will this be in the future? Are there plans to make it smaller again or not?

Is disabling features in the Phoenix-Kernel the same as if they would not be in the kernel at all (light/fast like void)?

My question is just based on curiosity!
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] snout:
You are SO Wrong !

The comment was made due to BAD ATTITUDE ! And not what i know and Dont know about the REAL issue. Hence dirty washing in public !
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] mbutandola:
Are you actually saying that the kernel is potentially dangerous?

Envoyé depuis mon GT-I9100 avec Tapatalk
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] Vaedryn:
Take a Pill and stay cool
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] beggar23:
I don't get the advantage of Weathley governor. It seems that it unintentionally powers up to the max when screen is on. Why is that? :confused:
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] chareos12:
I was thinking the same.

BTW, 1.24 works great for me. I'll soon try 1.25 !
[Galaxy S II Original Android Development] tonysac:
1.25 is brilliant..love the smoothness:)

Sent from Galaxy