yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
default twrp behaviours when wiping is make2fs instead of make4fs on your version no? also i said that i read on a s9 thread that cache should not be converted.

https://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=78145639&postcount=4

(dev points on step 3 to format data but cache might not be good. and in my experience it was not good.)

also in my tests i benchmarked using adrobench everything was slower under f2fs than ext4.

plus the whole hassel of installing roms that format to ext4 and having to backup and switch back.

down the road when stockfirmware will be released natively on f2fs will probably run great.( as new pixel devices are rumored be) but right now i have not seen 1 example of better performance. plus it make life more difficult to the end user to backup restore and flash roms.

speaking of rumors, theres a difference between a proof of concept and the actual reality of using it. right now to me that reality is no better than what we currently have.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] karapoutsoglou:
what are you talking about? i used dr ketan p11 with endurance and f2fs data and cache and clean install and the difference in speed, smoothness and installation of apps from play store are like day and night.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
glad it worked out for you. id realky like to see some before and after numbers.

ie: do the same clean install in regular ext4 do a bench.

then again do the same but on f2fs.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] karapoutsoglou:
what numbers ? i am talking about user experience, i dont need numbers. play store is flying with f2fs
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
and its not on a clean install of ketan p11 on ext4 ?

edit:

btw quick question, when you did your clean install, did you then backup your rom installation in twrp, format to f2sf data and cache, went to twrp option and checkboxed 'Use rm -rf instead of formating', and finaly restored data?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] karapoutsoglou:
below par compared to f2fs. i have bought around a thousand apps. i put them in queue to download. with f2fs they are installed instantly. same with titanium...
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
btw quick question, when you did your clean install, did you then backup your rom installation in twrp, format to f2sf data and cache, went to twrp option and checkboxed 'Use rm -rf instead of formating', and finaly restored data?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Sorry I may have been a little carried away! But I understood your answer to [MENTION=5752581]SammyTRK[/MENTION] as a denigration of this twrp

And just I think your answer does not really help him.

He would to try F2FS, the best way to know what it's like, is to try.

All these stuffs you describe aren't really related to twrp.

By the way guys, some of you report me issue while flashing zips, for exemple DevBase.

It seems to affect all exynos N9 and S9/S9+, from the april firmware (our CSDE), as long as you initialised your phone after a totally clean flash or reset.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] karapoutsoglou:
i did not backup anything. installed rom, installed kernel, first boot, then restart to recovery, then format data and cache to f2fs, then boot, liken factory reset and enjoy.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
woo have to try this, if it is really as crazy as that!:victory: Thanks
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
your work is appreciated. im just trying to figure out real world performance numbers so that i can do comparisons. also by reading other threads, i'm trying to to also understand why some say format cache when some say it might not be good. because in my tests ,formatting cache had strange results which i want to understand.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
Ok so here are some numbers using clean install of dr ketan p11 and endurance v2.0.19 in twrp with f2ds support.

( I had taken a set of pictures the exact same setup on ext4 but when formatting to f2fs forgot to backup. So I'll post back with those results after)

For the record, apps in play store did not "fly" and bench write speeds are no better than ext4...

I'll be back with ext4 results soon enough.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
And now for bench using clean install of ketan p11 on endurance v2.0.19 on twrp using data and cache ext4

(everything felt faster. So I'd like some to show me what I'm doing wrong because just stating that its faster and that apps are "flying" and that I don't know what I'm talking about is not a good reason or explanation. I like hard evidence. Btw my tests were done the same. Nothing running in the background. I let play store finish updating stock apps. And also had applied ketan essential fix and rebooted 2 times on each of my 2 tests between ext4 vs f2fs. I also did multiple bench tests so to not have any flukes or non standardized testing.)

At this point I'm calling it snake oil.

on a side note pretty much any clean install of a rom especially with endurance will have great performance. so anything that is 'felt' is probably due to those factors...
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] tycoon78[stoner]:
Btw do u know u need a fully optimized f2fs kernel merged from stable f2fs from git. Just using any kernel with f2fs config activated won't help u at all tbh. Use Zeus kernel, it's the most optimized for f2fs. Here is my SS with f2fs partition. F2fs increases writing speed which is more important n it beats ext4 in most of the test scenarios.

Maybe u should read here. It's written by [MENTION=4898097]arter97[/MENTION](one of the best kernel dev)

https://xdaforums.com/showpost.php?p=79333071&postcount=179
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
will try it. thanks but that link did not point to any android pie note 9 kernels. was under the impression that Endurance had full f2fs compatibility.

edit

btw id really like some before and after pictures with matching dates like i did. helps to put things in perspective.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
not bad for ext4:

latest v9 pie white wolf kernel, noname romv6, geiti94's unofficial twrp 3.2.3-0

the performance difference is so minimal that there is no value in bothering to screw around with f2fs.(flashing different roms and playing around and flashing stuff is almost impossible with f2fs. half the time scripts dont work because the mount points arent the same.)

but for the sake of science, ill install again beta 5 twrp from this thread and test it out again as it seems endurance did not provide good testing.( or maybe was it ketans rom the issue?) please note that on the present noname rom i have 500+ apps. alot more stuff running in the background and edxposed. so it is not the "cleanest" environment to test.

edit;

I couldn't boot nonamerom v6 in f2fs. i tried for 2 hours. restored old data, format data clean install, nothing worked.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] tycoon78[stoner]:
That's good result on ext4 but I myself have used ext4 for 8 months on note9 I guess. N after using f2fs I can say that f2fs is better for me because apps are getting installed faster on f2fs that's the reason why I'm not using ext4 so I couldn't show the benchmark of ext4. And Data storage benchmark has nothing to do with number of apps installed or running in background tbh. I use official xposed magisk.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
well the read and write bench and the database queries are exactly how apps get installed ...

installing an app is writing to data. registering it in the system DB is like database queries that the bench mark does. so ...lol

anyways...

i have 1 question for you :

do you have this magisk module installed:

fde.ai
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
Hey guys, using latest build but one problem: I cant format back to ext4. Everytime, it shows as f2fs, no matter how many times I format it. Can you help me?

EDIT; NEVERMIND IT IS WORKING. I had a custom theme and (Why?) it couldnt format while using that theme. Clean install resolved all!
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
[MENTION=4259991]Arteush[/MENTION] Deleting ODM partition in twrp what impact has on ROM?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] Da-BOSS:
I think it contains CSC files which is required for networking & sim ,etc.. my mind feels dusty :D .. don't delete :)
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
it will remove anything related to csc customizations( volte,wifi call, spam block, call record...etc). you shouldint loose conectivity but apn and carrier stuff will be removed for sure. and you wont be able to use the Samsung keyboard.

EFS is the one you really dont want to loose lol. always keep a backup somewhere off the phone.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] Woundedangel:
Root 9 960f exynos

How can I root my Note 9 Exynos

Model: 960F dual sim 128 GB

Android version : 9

One UI version: 1.0

Security patch: 1 March 2019

Kernal ver: 4.9.59.15135523

#Tue Feb 26 18:14:17 KST 2019
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
ODM contains all carrier configuration files, per region/country. And some system flags and specific parameter triggers for each regions, for example photo shutter sound of camera which is forced on without setting option in regions where laws requires it.

With Samsungs ROM, this partition is necessary.

With AOSP/GSI, I'm not sure.

Edit : Didn't see previous answers:silly:
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Search for "Magisk" in the forum.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Sorry for the delay, beta6 is on the way. With more device specific build flags.

But I can't get a bootable image :confused: :laugh:

I'm trying to figure out this issue, since even fresh beta5 build won't boot.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
[MENTION=4259991]Arteush[/MENTION] Thanks. also, it is safe to format it or should I let it as it is?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Why formatting? Explain your purpose.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] abtekk:
If you have to ask if it's safe to format, you probably shouldn't be formatting it. It's not doing any harm, just leave it alone, you'll gain nothing by wiping it.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] naya28:
hellow...

with ketan o8 and da boss kernel with twrp 3.3.2

what must I do to change to your twrp?

I want to try.

I know that I have to flash on recovery img.then change files system to f2fs on data and cach

thats all?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
Doing clean installs :P
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Check and thank [MENTION=851910]DA BOSS[/MENTION] and [MENTION=5877792]tycoon78[stoner][/MENTION] for this

F2FS converting guide

And be careful with your internal storage datas as photos, musics, etc...
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Provided you plan to flash an odm.img with odin or anything else after that, yes.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] XuanTruong:
Good.[emoji106]

Gửi từ SM-N960F của tôi bằng cách sử dụng Tapatalk
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] yarpiin:
Cache should stay ext4 ;)

Why ? - not worth effort (no improvment ) and might cause stability issues including bootloops.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
i had those issues. plus on this twrp beta 5, even when on ext4, some scripts and permissions dont seem to work properly.

i use a csc selector zip that i modded from rkkg1994 and djb77(with their permission of course) and it fails to work. on old twrp it works fine.

https://1drv.ms/f/s!AhXVLDDj8g3AgeA6IyH1iTzQAGB4MA
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] Da-BOSS:
:fingers-crossed::highfive::)
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Yep there is an issue with zip flash, yarpiin have the same with his twrp builds. Top of devs ( not like me :laugh: ) are informed and investigate.

A least, the first zip script flash won't work. But after that, all zips should work as expected ;)

Edit: You confirm too that ONLY first flash fails?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
you ask if i should flash 2 times in a row?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] naya28:
it s okay for me ,I just backup my data partition(ext4),flashed with odin 13.3.1 recovery :cowboy:3.3.1 wich ereased all my datas,used smart switch to restore a part of datas ,then restore my data s backup,with the option (DA BOSS TOLD ME)use rm instead of format in recovery options.

No issue at all...

I m staying on o8 Ketan s rom ...so it s easy...
[MENTION=749726]seraphin[/MENTION]

and sorry for my english language.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
flashing twrp dosen't erase your data. and restoring using rm switch just erases instead of format before restoring your data. so basicaly you didint change anything apart from backing up and restoring data.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] Da-BOSS:
Happy to help ;)
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] naya28:
here you are.and tel me why should want to make a backup with the new recovery with data partition @0MB?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] naya28:
oOo and I keep magisk 18.1 I have issues with 19. versions...

I ve also bootloops on lions rom because of magisk update...
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Be aware that instability have been shown with F2FS cache. ;)
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] naya28:
not at all
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] naya28:
sorry this is not the good one
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
because the way you explained it. i know now that the language barrier is what made it appear as you didn't change file type.( if you re read your last comment you'll see you skipped the part where you should have said you changed the data system file type)

---------- Post added at 11:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:57 AM ----------

that dosen't show us anything. apart from slow performance.

at least use a disk bench utility.

---------- Post added at 12:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:58 AM ----------

happy that now the issues i reported back on the 17th of May are now seen as real issues....:svetius:

( flashing zip issues and booting/cache issues)
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Dude if you could please be more comely! Because it's very annoying, always in conflicts. In all posts I saw from you I can feel a bit of lofty.

It does not make you want to help you.

[MENTION=1916153]naya28[/MENTION] post was enough clear to understand he switches to F2FS.

And you are not the only first guy who reported that the 17th may or whenever. It's a real issue from day 0 when it happened.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Major update, see first post, it can now be called a release :laugh: :victory: :good:
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
dont worry you don't need to help me personally.

the issues i bring up are issues that occur on all devices.

and issues that are day 0, usually would be documented in OP to stop the bad people like me from reporting it.

:cowboy:

edit:

now that the zip flash issue has been added to OP(thanks) i can stop reporting it.

Just need to add the part where formating cache to f2fs might lead to instability or bootloops.

but it dosen't stop me from appeciating the work you put in.

if i address other users in the way that i do, its to stop them from spreading miss information. there is alot of that going on and being the realist that i am, my nature forces me to address them in that same manner. if i pass as being as a meanie or in conflict with some of them then im sorry that it looks that way. sometimes truth isint always accepted with open arms.

have a nice day
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
And again.

Thanks you for the lesson
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
hate to be the bearer of bad news again but there are graphical artifacts in the UI. 50% of the time when booting to recovery i get either pixelated effect ( like old TV with bad reception) or black lines.

also the issue with executing scripts is still present. even if zip flashes successfully( flash 1 or 2 or 3 rimes in a row) something did not get processed. if i flash back old recovery, scripts execute properly.( the log i posted from csc selector shows that no errors in processing the script. the exact same zip file flashed in old twrp with exactly same log output works properly, here is the zip file incase you are curious: https://1drv.ms/f/s!AhXVLDDj8g3AgeA6IyH1iTzQAGB4MA

)

also

if you need testers before posting a build just ask.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
Strangely I don't have seen such artefacts issue since few days (we are two to test). Maybe the updated graphic driver. I will take a look.

For zips I hear now that nobody have same results.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] tycoon78[stoner]:
Tbh I dont have any instability with cache as f2fs. Been using from 20 days on note9 n maybe for 3 n half years on my s7 edge.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
i have a question for you, do you have this magisk module installed and activated :

fde.ai

(or had it installed in the past 2 weeks or so)
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] tycoon78[stoner]:
Ofcourse I have magisk module installed n xposed too but I dont have that module which u said.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
fde.ai is a magisk module not an xposed one.

so again, have you had this magisk module installed currently or recently:

fde.ai
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] tycoon78[stoner]:
Ah sorry I dont have that module installed.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] tycoon78[stoner]:
I tried that just now, it slows down the writing performance by half lol. ????
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
for me it gives me the same performance as in the screen shot without the need to change file system
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] tycoon78[stoner]:
On f2fs it's slows down the writing n reading speed.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
yeah. and like i said on stock file system ext4, it boosts speeds. so someone that dosent want to go through all the trouble of formatting and issues with flashing zips/scripts can stay on stock file system and reap the benefits.

ahw od uoy naem elbissopmi? i kniht ereht si a egaugnal reirrab gnipots uoy morf gnidnatsrednu em. osla fi na rehto resu stnaw ot yas gnihtemos yeht nac yas ti sevlesmeht.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] naya28:
If U think that it s impossible,let the others try by themself.Da Boss s right, you re just looking for fights.

Sorry OP and Moderators, this guy makes me tired.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] PhillipRamos:
what rom supports f2fs?
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] naya28:
essaies en Francais Bob...;)
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
Yes, have the same problem regarding flashing problems!! I have flashed a gallery_fix from dr ketan, on 3.2.3 it worked, but now on 3.3.1 it doesnt work anymore. And exactly, no errors during flashing process
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
its either the mount points or calling certain functions. the logs are clean so its very difficult to know what fails. or it might be when applying permissions.

at least we're 2 reporting the issue so i know im not crazy.

so the others that suffer from Stockholm syndrome can go take a hike...lol
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
Yep, clean install dr ketan

On this twrp- Magisk requires a special zip in order to function properly, on 3.2.3 it flashes correctly from the very beginning

On his twrp- anything that modifies app like custom theme center or gallery_fix doesnt work, on twrp 3.2.3 works

I grabbed 3+ logs, nothing wrong, everything flashes as usual.

Too strange for me
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
what is this special magisk you talk about
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
Nothing special, it aks me first time when I open the app to install required components or additional things. It is a start-only pop up, first time
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] moderndaycowboy:
graphical glitches are not fixed on r 1.1

I cannot download Alexandr Note 9 Rom via 3.3.1.0

it says partitions not found.

It can be flashed via 3.2.1.0
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
It will be totally fixed with next release.

Strange and not obvious as I never suffered from that. It seems to not affect all device.

And sorry for this very annoying zip issue :( for which nothing concrete is still found but work is in progress.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
oh ive seen that before.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] moderndaycowboy:
it is only occured while I was trying to flash alexandr's roms.

AOSP and PIE roms can be flashed without error.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
its the way the scripts is written. nothing to do with if its a aosp or pie .zip its how the dev has written his edify or bash script and how he calls functions and stuff.

one exception is some gsi aosp roms are in img format which has no scripts installing it. its just and image being unpacked to a target partition in wich case should always work.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
can you post a link to the zip ure having issues with( ketans galery fix)

i want to compare with the zip im havj g issues with and compair parts of the scripts and see if i can triangulate what might be failling

thx
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
Here
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] bober10113:
ok i think this confirms that it might be related to busybox mounting the partitions and subsequent permissions being applied.(or not applied case being looked at)

ill make you an other version of the zip with regular mounting instead of busybox.

if it works after then we know thats the issue.

as of right now if i make a new zip when can you test?

here let me know if this flashes:

https://1drv.ms/u/s!AhXVLDDj8g3AgqQmXj_kTYiv_IUeZQ

i cant test since i never had gallery fc and not on same rom
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] azZA_09:
I clean installed everything using 3.2. Idk if I can test soon enough. Maybe someone else
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
r2 would seem to fix most of zip fails :highfive:
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] 3arthur6:
As I explained to you in PM, yes all busybox ( in fact it's toolbox but basically it's the same ) binaries calls just fail. We know that, and I told it to you yesterday. And in practice, again as I explained to you, it doesnt help to solve this issue. But if you want to replace all busybox tools with basic fonctions you will have fun for weeks.