yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] BrandoHD:
Your opinions won't get any respect in here, because you came in here without and respect

I have been watching the entire thing unfold, and you have continuously claim that users posting their results are invalid, this is where

you will always be wrong

. The only valid test to some users is that they used stock and had X percent of battery left after a days use, or they got X amount of SOT and when they used Franco or any other kernel, they got MORE as compared to using stock, the fact that you did a controlled test and got similar results is of no more importance, or, is not more valid than the experience of other users with their personal devices, the sooner you learn that, the better it will be for you

I am one of those users, there is absolutely nothing you can say or do that will ever convince me that Franco is not more batter friendly, because after using both, Franco was more battery friendly, in real life, in real usage, do you really think you classifying that as placebo effect makes it invalid, when I actually live it everyday???
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] jarjar124:
I see a lot of Wi-Fi commits.... Not sure if fixes though.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
Hello, seems like we might have a kernel commit. Its a fix, even if its not related to the notification delay, a fix is always a fix.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] yokuyuki:
It looks like fixes for wifi channels 12-14 which don't work in the US.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] jarjar124:
Hmm... did not know that. Well I learn something new everything :)
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] JNewms:
At the risk of sounding like a flashaholic, I'm up for a fix (kernel) :)

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Xparent Skyblue Tapatalk 2
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] thebryceee:
Yes! I use my phone the way I want to, everything synced and all that and still get a respectable 4 hours SOT.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] yokuyuki:
Great! I get 3 hours, but that's just because I have a **** ton of stuff syncing and Latitude on.

But just because you're fine with battery life doesn't mean an objective test to gauge battery efficiency is undesirable. I don't really play any heavy games on my phone, but I think Miasmic's fps tests have some merit and I'm grateful that he takes the time to run the tests for our benefit.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] thebryceee:
3 SOT is respectable. I wasn't even getting that on stock
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Ok_Kaleidoscope5109:
I'm sorry to have offended you. I can come in with a nicer tone.

It's not like I don't like users posting experiences. They can. It's first hand feedback for Franco to use, and it's the most we get. But at the same time, when it's regarding something not as readily measured in a reproducible and reliable way (Gage R&R anyone?), we can't make conclusions about battery life that easily. Yes, I shouldn't pick on users saying they're wrong, but at the same time, how can you say I'm wrong.

I know who you are. You and I got in a huge argument on the SGS2 thread. Remember that? This was at least a year ago when Exynos development was borked and the GPS was absolutely screwed up. You claimed that you saw no GPS issues and that I shouldn't be insinuating that there are GPS issues because I can't speak for all users. You repeatedly bashed me despite the developers Entropy512 and other members of Team Hacksung stating that the GPS was borked. I can tell what matters to you and that's your experience. So if you don't see GPS issues, it's fine to you.

That's great and all, but at the same time we can't rule out the problem simply because one user (you) or some other users don't run into the issue. This is a basic mistake we make as junior engineers that they teach you in every Six Sigma class. You can't say two things are the same. They won't be. You just don't have enough evidence to say otherwise (reject the alternative, accept null hypothesis).

Anyhow, going back to the issue at hand. You tell me that users will typically use stock and record X percent battery at the end of the day and compare it to a custom kernel's Y percent at the end of the day and conclude that Y > X, thus custom kernel is better. But you know very well that's not a great comparison. There's plenty of variation there, and while they can think that custom kernel wins, is their assumption correct? That's what I'm getting at. I'd LOVE to believe Franco gives me better battery life. I want to say it's the best damn kernel in the world, but at the same time it should be evident through tests. You tell me that you live it everyday, but this is a more philosophical issue than anything else. The subjective truth for you may not be the objective truth. If it is, great, that's what I'm trying to find out through objective tests. But apparently all that matters to you is the subjective truth. No need to verify and validate.

Anyway, I've said enough. If my tests are bad, fine, there should be some way to show that Franco is better in battery life and have the test actually mean something. I'm an engineer, and part of manufacturing engineering is being able validate claims and specifications. I'll work my butt off to find the appropriate test, but for now my tests are what they are.

Coming up tonight: UV battery testing and SGS2 battery testing. Let's see how different devices compare! Maybe I'll throw in a Nexus S if I can charge it up.

---------- Post added at 05:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:03 PM ----------

Miasmic is a champ. I love him for doing those tests.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Leegalaxy:
Figured I would just post this. Rather read this excellent post over and over than the pretentious pissing match that's been going on here.

It only takes two people to ruin things.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] simorangkir_dcs:
You need to create your own thread dude. Maybe called "battery kernel testing comparison or what"

But I know why you don't do that. It'll be dull. Just like a funeral.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] JNewms:
Let's not get back into the arguments. The thread was just cleaned up. If he wants to test, let him test. Flaming him or vice versa isn't going to accomplish anything except making it even harder for people to keep up with the relevant posts discussing development

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Xparent Skyblue Tapatalk 2
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] yokuyuki:
I have to ask, when you say stock, do you mean 4.2.1 or 4.2.2? I ran 4.2.1 stock and the battery life on that was horrendous due to the hsic wakelocks and had to run to Franco for relief. After I updated to 4.2.2, I ran stock for a while before I ran back to Franco for the gamma, but from running stock 4.2.2 for a few days, the battery life wasn't very different from Franco at that point. Now Franco has definitely made some changes since then, but I don't think the difference is as drastic as it was during the 4.2.1 days. While that's a subjective conclusion, I'd really love to see a good objective test confirm or deny that.

Really, is this necessary? See below.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] irishrally:
Not getting involved here but a variable related to battery life I don't here about much is the health of the battery. Some of our ~6 month old batteries will be at a disadvantage over brand new N4 batteries.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Ok_Kaleidoscope5109:
Depends how much you charge right? Li-Po batteries should be good for at least 300, if not closer to 500 charges.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] yokuyuki:
This is a good point and that just means that battery life measurements across users is even less comparative.

Good thing I'm on a year upgrade cycle so I don't have to suffer an extra year with a degraded battery.

---------- Post added at 08:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:28 PM ----------

Each charge is going to decrease the full capacity of the battery so regardless after 6 months, full capacity of the battery is less than spec.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
I doubt that :p
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] irishrally:
Yes, cycles dependent among other things like heat. It's fairly easy to check your peak battery voltage. I know mine has dropped off some.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
Ok I have a few ideas on how to improve responsiveness and battery life a little more. I'm thinking of making interactive a little bit smarter and create something that I can call a simple and small governor inside a governor. I want to scale interactive tunables based on system load so for example we can scale go_hispeed_load, timer_rate and min_sampling_time based on how much the system is under stress or not.

Thoughts on how we should scale them like if system load is > X% decrease timer_rate to XXms for example? I already have a few ideas but I want to hear some from you guys.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] thebryceee:
4.2.2. I ran stock for about a couple of months, so roughly 60 charge cycles, give or take. I consistently got about 2 hours of SOT with everything synced. Been running this kernel since then and consistently got 3-4 hours SOT. Just personal experience is all, not trying to knock any testing methods in any way, shape or form.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] irishrally:
My decreased battery voltage caused an accidental thanks.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Dan53:
Good luck with increasing battery life and responsiveness. One thing I'd say is some people don't use default values for the tunables. So it'd be good if you could increase the tunable by a certain percent. So for example, under X% load decrease timer_rate to X.XX times kernel app timer_rate. Rather than hard coding a ms value for the tunable.

Does that make sense?

Edit: a problem with this is you set the tunable as a percent OF THE NEW VALUE each time. So effectively it could just go to a really high/small value pretty quickly of you aren't careful. So yeah... Maybe kernel app shouldnt set actual tunables but sets a variable which the tunables is adjusted by. If this doesn't make sense I'll try to explain again
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
Hmm... yes and no. I'm gonna experiment first and see what can I come up with, but that idea is not bad at all!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Dan53:
The second bit was saying in the kernel app you set a 'benchmark_tunable' so the actual tunable is set by the benchmark, that way the value doesn't keep getting adjusted by the new value.

So instead of

Tunable = X.XX times tunable

Which could make values extremely small or big, we have

Tunable = X.XX times benchmark_tunable

I'm not sure which percentages of the benchmark_tunables would be good under certain loads. That's the point of nighties though!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
Yes thats a good idea!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Dan53:
Bit of development is always good in a development thread! Will anxiously wait for the next nightly then!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

30000

root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

30000

root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

15000

root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

15000

During a benchmark, I didn't echo. At the moment go_hispeed_load and min_sample_time are also scaling. I'm gonna ask minooch for some feedback.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Bobtehblob:
Forever relevant.

[YOUTUBE]I0spFY1I2NQ[/YOUTUBE]
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] LibiSC:
Battery life is cool but Franco if you can find a way too improve other stuff like picture quality or video recording or who knows... maybe you know more about the new trends and hacks... or since this is a developer thread you can enlight us with knowledge about the kernels... android or linux.... where to read to understand better the changes you make.... That way people will have more to discuss than battery life tests, that in my experience with the kernel i compiled and shared for galaxy ace, people are never satisfied with.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] ngkongArm:
I wish there will be so many explanation and ideas just like this from the others rather than arguing each other statements. so i can learn too. :D

Great franco! It makes me want to learn how to tweaks kernel. Not just build an app. :D
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Underground_XI:
gotta love the "ignore list" feature xda offers!!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
I usually explain all my changes on github, its fairly easy to read the commits.

About picture quality and video I don't know anything about media stuff, therefore I won't mess with them.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] mustangtim49:
Yeah, I know who tops the list, too.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
Heres a quick boot.img for testing the latest feature I just explained. I'm still coding stuff on it but wanted to get some quick feedback before I released it for real.

When the load is big, for example games or benchmarks:

above_hispeed_freq_delay = 0

go_hispeed_load = 85%

timer_rate = 15000

min_sample_time = 80000

When the load is low, for example moving around in the system or browsing:

above_hispeed_freq_delay = 50000

go_hispeed_load = 99%

timer_rate = 30000

min_sample_time = 20000

fastboot flash boot boot.img

Try and give me some feedback. If you don't know how to flash it then don't bother, this is not for you.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Underground_XI:
Hehe good boy;)
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] BurnRubber90:
Aaargh.. if only i had my pc with me :(.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] spicediablo:
Apparently this supports slide 2 wake

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=me.paranoid.touchcontrol

Sent from Mako
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] vickpick:
Flashing it. I'll let you know in a couple of hours.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] drawde40599:
I just flashed it walking around toy isle at Target :P

build 666, nice franco

---------- Post added at 07:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:13 PM ----------

Yep works great with Franco, alot of us use it
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] PetritH:
I just wonder how many of you guys turn events logging off?? I Do.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] vickpick:
Hmmm... unfortunately performance is reduced drastically for some reason. >3000 decrease in antutu scores (did 3 of them) from 16k to 13k.

Better (less) battery drain during these test than my past antutu tests.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] BrandoHD:
I do also, will only turn it in if I start experiencing issues

Sent from neXus 4 using Tapatalk 2
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] spicediablo:
The latest version supports r122 build

Sent from Mako
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] elk2210:
I don't use this feature, but why it should harm the battery? The charging speed is exactly the same with this feature as charging from AC.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Sim-1:
Downloading the new version through your app. Really nice and convenient way to update and flash on the go!! :o
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] digitalfrost:
I cannot select interactive anymore on r19 an 8.2.4. Is this a bug or a feature? I understand making ondemand the default, but I had no problems with interactive so far and would like to use it.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] air2k57:
Dumb question... Can a kernel have any effect on signal strength? I have noticed my signal going out lately in places I used to get pretty good coverage at, the only thing I've changed was use Franco kernel and try couple of Roms.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] ceejay83:
Noticed if i have my phone charging via a/c, it shows USB in settings. I have fast charge off
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
Interactive is disabled until I get an answer from Todd Poynor. I managed to get a fairly easy reproducible kernel panic few hours ago just as soon as I selected it.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] ben_pyett:
are you using original charger? Check that cable it's properly connected. Mine does this occasionally, unplug and reconnect charger normally toggles it for me
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] ceejay83:
Yes original charger. Just unplugged everything and its the same
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] fye85:
Fast charge mean more heat, and the heat can damage the battery
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] d0nnie:
Does the fast charge option even work on the Nexus 4? I thought it was there for Galaxy Nexus only and that it didn't really do anything on the N4. Can anyone with some insight confirm or deny this?
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] ben_pyett:
Yes, fast charge works when toggled using the Franco app. it only generates the same amount of heat as standard AC charging, which has already been said by francoa few posts ago!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] fye85:
OK thanks for repeating so ;)

Sent from my Nexus 4
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] mosd:
Installed thru your app how do I know if I got the latest version installed?
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] ketchup4life:
Go into your phone settings and on the bottom select "about phone". The kernel name and version number should be somewhere near the bottom!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] ben_pyett:
Go into the Franco kernel updater application and it's the first option
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] alcurtis93:
I understand this is an early build but it's certainly more laggy than stock. Will see about battery though
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] mosd:
It's just empty! And in settings it says #17 is that it?
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] jhericurls:
Your on #17! What's the problem?!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Ranguvar:
The lag can be resolved if you get r18 and set go_hispeed_load to 85 with the app.

I haven't gotten any lag yet with r19 but right now there's a bunch of change with governers so things will be rocky for a while.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] alcurtis93:
I'm on r19 now and is certainly laggier than stock. I'll hang on in there though :) just bought the app to support.

Does it notify of new kernel updates or must I go into the app to check?
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] rumirand:
Governorception.

Trying your test build (#666, nice). Using the phone seems as responsible as it was on r122. Will report battery life later.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
Weird, I got a nice score boost through all the benchmarks. That doesn't make much sense specially because the tunables are being set for performance during high load. Are you sure your device is not throttling or something?
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] drawde40599:
It gets updated alot, that app has been known and working for months now.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] simms22:
dancing naked again?

its funner when you get a whole group to dance naked with you ;)

---------- Post added at 11:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:32 PM ----------

:highfive:
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] drawde40599:
its only been 15 min, but ive been on phone since install and i cant really say i notice any real change, i wanna say feels snappier but may be just in my head, but definitely not any performance loss
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] vickpick:
how do I check if it is throttling? Look at freq's during the test?

Looking at it right now and all cores running at full freq.

EDIT: I'll revert to 122 and check my antutu again

ReEDIT: Just rebooted the phone and tried an Antutu and back to my 16K. Weird.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] simms22:
you can probably see it in a dmesg.

it throttles until it cools down, then its back to normal. you probably got hot while benchmarking, so your cpu speed was lowered.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] LibiSC:
I know.... I use some stuff from your other kernels in the galaxy ace kernel, just using the description in your commits... but it you can provide links to the sources where you got the hint or the idea or why that change is a good change... just to have something to discuss... just saying... keep up the good work :good:
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] vickpick:
that's a possibility. I was skirting 60 C when started all three benchmarks
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] simms22:
60C when you started the benchmarks? :eek:

its not a possibility, its most likely. lol. next time you want to start benchmarks around 60C, be sure to disable thermal throttling ;)
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] vickpick:
Sorry about the false alarm, it must've been thermal throttling. I can't confirm because I rebooted and couldn't access the dmesg anymore.

I just did another one where there is probably thermal throttling..

There are lines that say

"[time stamp] msm_thermal: max cpu0 frequency changes to 702 MHz - polling every 120 ms"

Does that sound like it? Crazy thing, I started the test at 40 C this time and still hit 70 C in 10 seconds
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] Hanny:
something like dynamic interactive right eh? I thought for some reason interactive was back to the default in gnex.

and i see input_boost_freq is exported, nice :cowboy:

r122 and 0418 r666 gaming test

thermal throttle threshold = 85

gta busy road results

thalamus hotplugging google interactive 29-31

mpdecison google interactive 31-33

mpdecision conservative 35-37

mpdecision lazy 29-32

mpdecision codeaurora interactive (original) 32-34

mpdecision codeaurora interactive (tweaked) 30-32

m1 interactive (timer_rate=20000) 30-32

r110 interactive (default timer_rate=50000) 28-31

r110 interactive (manual timer_rate=20000) 32-34

#franco-hotplugging era begins#

r115 interactive (default timer_rate=50000) (default_first_level=70) 30-31

r116 interactive (default timer_rate=30000) (default_first_level=80) 32-33 / 34-35

r118 interactive (default timer_rate=30000) (default_first_level=90) 32

r118 interactive 1512/1512 (default timer_rate=30000) (default_first_level=90) 37-38 =proving fps now depends more on freq than hotplug

r120 interactive (everything default) 31-32

r121 interactive (everything default) 31-32 - "bug" fixed, but still 4 cores during heavy (gta) and lighter (beach buggy) games

r122 interactive (everything default) (gov control = 15000,99,1512,1,45000,30000) 31-32

r666 interactive (everything default)

GTA busy road max graphics - 30-31 average fps

while the car is running on the road,

root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

cat timer_rate

30000

root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

cat timer_rate

30000

root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

cat timer_rate

30000

in tests before, lowering timer_rate certainly increases fps in games so the gaming profile will surely benefit gaming, however the profile did not activate

i believe the lowered fps from 122 is due to min_sample_time getting lowered from 45000 to 20000 (in daily usage profile)

for another game, Beach buggy blitz

r122 50-53 average fps

r666 58 average fps DRASTIC IMPROVEMENT because gaming profile is activated

root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

cat timer_rate

15000

root@android:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/interactive # cat timer_rate

cat timer_rate

15000

the question: how does the governor determine heavy and light load? weird that a heavier game did not achieve gaming profile's stress level.
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] drawde40599:
666

Loving 666!!
[Nexus 4 Original Android Development] franciscofranco:
The load comes from the Hotplug driver because we're already getting the average load, no need to re-duplicate code and add it to the governor. How many cores were online when you checked that in GTA?