[ONE Android Development] Purerawenergy:
This is one of the better explanations I've found to differentiate the confusion between CAF & AOSP. Jorge spent 20 minutes trying to explain this to me so when I started to research it, i found this and it made it a bit clearer for me. Even though I consider myself a power user, the very things that drive our devices are the things I understand the least. I'm the type, like I'm sure most of you are that NEED to know WHY things do what they do, but this still remains (for me now at least) a bit too complex, which is why I've been using [MENTION=2040569]jgcaap[/MENTION]s kernel stock with "as-is" settings since first flashing his cm12.1 ROM several months ago. IMHO, some things are best left to the builders/devs, especially when they are building kernels and ROMs together for the purpose of stability, performance, optimizations and better battery life. So in the name of "honestly" testing each of his builds I personally try to keep EVERYTHING as close to stock as possible before I post any "bugs" or "issues." THIS community (thread) is the engine of LAG-FREE development and what has now made this "THE" best Marshmallow daily driver AND why this thread has exploded here in XDA. This is just an observation, I'm not trying to police the thread, just speaking my mind.

CAF=Custom Aftermarket Firmware. You might have seen this acronym all over the forums back when kernel developers for Qualcomm Snapdragon devices maintained two separate forks of their work. One for code based on Google’s AOSP, and another based on CAF. Code Aurora Forum is maintained by the Linux Foundation, and is where Qualcomm releases the reference sources for their various platforms. Most OEMs base their kernel source off of what’s provided by Qualcomm. On the other hand AOSP works off of a fork of CAF for each Android software iteration, introducing new features for all Android devices along the way. Over time, CAF then introduces its own optimizations intended specifically for Snapdragon devices.

Which brings me my last point.

Is it possible that user-related settings or 3rd party kernels and the apps used tweak them be the culprit of the mini freezes or even little lags rather than the J's kernel itself? Because as a themer myself, I occasionally notice performance or graphical anomalies when trying different themes so it makes me wonder if the glitches (say) in Chrome and are from using theme from CM Theme that may theme Chrome (as some do) so couldn't it be possible that the themes themselves may be causing these "issues" and not the kernel. I know while testing in some ROM threads, developers won't address "bugs" or "issues" if there are variables like themes and (especially) Xposed Framework and mods which is why I have been so long winded about keeping things stock, as not to misdirect [MENTION=2040569]jgcaap[/MENTION] to start dismantling the kernel when it could be something else entirely. Like I said, just wanted to mention this and am not trying to offend anyone or their input, but since this thread is so relaxed and no one has mentioned this in quite a while ( though common sense should dictate this) maybe, just maybe, some of the many users here now just needed to be reminded of how to replicate, etc. Sorry for being long winded, only making a point that i feel needs to be made. Thanks for reading.

Tom-alpha

---------- Post added at 02:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:08 PM ----------

No, you're not alone. I've still on that build and because of what I've been reading about Jan 1st &2nd I decided to stay here and man now that the ROM's settled in I'm getting unreal deep sleep and it's really responsive and snappy.

Tom-alpha