yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Either way my main point was that the CPU performance likes to be not exactly solid. It goes up and down. Geekbench to a lesser extent. I really have no clue what is causing this
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
by the way, no. The videos are legit. I own an iPad Pro 2020 and the decoding and encoding is very very smooth. There is something that we are overlooking. Even my Samsung Galaxy Tab A7 does better actually!

However only AnTuTu has the issue. PCmark does much more complete tests about it and it’s smooth..
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
(Wrong) I noticed that the LITTLE cores get stuck at 1950MHz max if their maximum frequency is tuned too often. Also big cores will stop single core/dual core boosting. Reboot always fixes things (though big cores don't look like they boost still. And after a while the little cores get stuck at 1950 again). It gets annoying. I am pretty sure I installed the Kernel right. Is it something I'm doing?

(Wrong) Edit: It appears the issue has to do with Samsung's In-Kernel stock Hotplugging. Disabling it and modifying values causes these glitches. And even if I re-enable it the issues remain until reboot.

Edit 2: Nevermind the Edit 1. At a certain point during the Geekbench 5 run (70-86%), the small cores once again cap at 1950MHz max. Big cores however don't stop boosting to the higher frequencies. The two issues apparently are not related to each other.

Edit 3: Apparently the cause of the LITTLE cores capping at 1950MHz is one of Geekbench 5's tests...for some reason. Geekbench 4 in fact doesn't give me the same issue.

Edit 4: Another issue also prevents me from increasing the big cores's quad core frequency over 1794MHz, which is stock frequency. Rebooting doesn't solve the issue. I'll have to try and find some kind of system logs or something so that I can see just what's happening.

Edit 5: I have addressed what actually happens. Apparently changing the quad core frequency of the CPU seems not effective from the Kernel manager as it reverts back to 1794MHz on display. However when running a single threaded benchmark and the CPU attempts to boost to single core frequency, the maximum frequency appears to be the one set in the Kernel manager (in my case, 1924MHz). Quad core frequency remains 1794MHz. Basically the true max frequency is modified but not the quad core frequency, which makes sense considering these kernel managers don't support the single/dual/tri/quad core frequency scaling the 9810 uses. And as far as I'm aware, none exists that allows that kind of flexibility.

Edit 6: Disabling Samsung's stock hotplugging prevents the cores from single core boosting. Toggling it back on reverses the issue.

Edit 7: A possible momentary fix could be to use the minimum frequency instead of the maximum frequency to modify the quad core clock speed. However it's always recommended to NOT put the minimum frequency above the maximum. And even though in this case it technically doesn't count since the maximum would always be higher or equal (2886MHz), the displayed maximum in the Kernel manager is still 1794MHz.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
that's very detailed, but require further investigations. however ppl claimed the hotplug do play a role. besides it seems that the linkage between gpu and cpu is very tight, and i have removed some of them. so you may find that some values are different from other kernels.

on one hand it pushes up the overall performance but on the other hand it may affect some benchmarkings, aka the scores, or even gaming, i dono. of coz it depends on which benchmarking tools or tests you r going to run

regarding some of the issues, i have the following suggestions

1 read very carefully when you set the values or change the settings in some kernel managers. as i mentioned before, i noticed it shut down 2 big cores when the rules were applied. you may refer to my previous post talking about this

2 you may try to set the cpu freq as below

little cores: min = 260 or whatever u choose, max around 8xx to 1k

big cores: min MUST BE set to a freq lower then little cores's max freq, while max can be anything you want

eg, max little core=950, then min big core=949 etc

this will make a smooth transition (min big core covers part of max little core) and try to force it to bias the big cores more. what it does is for efficiency and effectiveness

however, if you are just looking for the scores or numbers, this is not for you, and you will notice a drop in benchmarking since the little cores are limited

anyway, it depends on how you will use your phone. these are the benefits of a custom kernel, you decide it

hope it helps

ps i am still learning

edit that's why i don like antutu, it always make me sad 😄
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Thank you for the suggestions. By the way no, I am not all for numbers and benchmarking. I am a power user, therefore I tend to use heavy applications and from time to time I even game on my phone (Genshin Impact is an example).

Besides, this is the one and only N960F Kernel that supports One UI 2.5 based ROMs, including the stock one. So even in case I didn't actually like it, I wouldn't have had much choice besides the crappy stock kernel. The goal here is to make this one as complete as possible, I guess.

The little note is that as of now, I've never noticed cores shutting down on their own. Actually all the cores appear to always be active. I've never ran into this problem in my whole adventure with this Kernel so far.

Since you are still learning, me being here reporting the issues with how the Kernel manager interfaces with the Kernel itself is pretty useful. It should make the troubleshooting job easier for you. And this is an issue that doesn't have anything to do with benchmarking or gaming. It's literally the Kernel manager failing to properly communicate with the Kernel. And it should be fixed in my humble opinion.

Either way even without any overclock the Kernel is amazing as it is. So there's no worries.

Fyi: AnTuTu is one of the most inaccurate benchmarks around. So don't be sad. Use Geekbench 5 and 3DMark instead.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
i didnt shut down any core by myself, at least for now. the manager did it incorrectly
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
I mean I never said you shut cores down lol. I am just saying this bug didn't happen to me. Which thank God it didn't.

For now I am still working around the current bugs of the Kernel that prevent me from tuning the maximum Quad Core frequency properly.

And thanks to said tuning I so far have been able to achieve a whopping 29% increase in performance on PCMark which is the real life user experience benchmark of choice.

This is the proof of just how good this Kernel is. All that has to be done is this bug fixing.

Regarding the hotplugging, it is notoriously slow. Samsung's Hotplugging I mean. And it's the main reason why the phone doesn't have great performance on the stock Kernel. In fact, in a Performance Governor-like setup on the CPU, I am able to get results far greater than a mere 29% increase in PCMark. That is literally Snapdragon 845 territory (And sometimes above it). And I am starting to believe that the phone locking at 1950MHz in some circumstances is some kind of buggy throttling threshold. Additionally, during gaming the GPU is stuck at 260MHz and very rarely goes above, doesn't seem to listen to me if I raise the minimum clock. Doesn't matter the load. In benchmark it goes at 572MHz. Odd. Still seems to be a throttling issue. You gotta take a look into the thresholds.

I am here to provide numbers to testify the effectiveness of the improvements and progress you will make over the time. It's the only Kernel for my phone, so it's in my interest as well to help you out. Now I'll cut the bother lol. I have most likely been way too leechy. Keep up the good work mate!
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
no, your tests and results are invaluable, as i don have time to perform tests like you did

you mean the tweaks/tunnings i provided yeilds a 30% increase in performance with pc mark? i cant believe it. that's a huge improvement.coz whenever i run a benchmark i will reset the max min to the default values so i didnt notice the difference it produces since i use those settings all the time

btw, by looking at the kernel manager again, it seems some of the features were missing due to it was a redo based on a previous version which was proven to be the best performer, with other tweakings removed temporarily together with gpu oc. i will add them back bit by bit if they help actually
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
You're right. I apologize that I forgot about your busy schedule. Then there is no problem for me to keep providing benchmarks and gaming numbers. I can actually provide far more details than beforehand. So you can even stop benchmarking to save some time. I'll do it.

And yes. The +30% results are actually achievable with your Kernel, but not with the stock frequency range (attention, no overclocking intended). With the stock range, aka 650-1794MHz big and 455-1794MHz SMALL, PCMark still sees a tangible 11% improvement. Going for such wide frequencies ranges with Samsung's scheduler is a bad idea because it's slow in ramping up the frequency (410ms to go up to 1794MHz from min according to Andrei). And in my experience, just raising minimum small frequency to about 1GHz and minimum big frequency to about 1.2GHz minimum brought that increase to the 29% I mentioned. Putting it in a performance-like status (which means no transition across frequencies at all) gave me results so high I ACTUALLY managed to beat an Exynos 9820 and almost match a Snapdragon 855 in PCMark, which is a daily usage benchmark, which made me extremely impressed and you should be too.

And this wouldn't even be detrimental to battery life. Like you said before, the flexibility of the Custom Kernels comes from this. We can put whatever we want, when we want it. And profiles furtherly make that easier. So that one can put power saving measures when needed, and full performance also when needed. It's a win-win! And these results wouldn't have been achieved with the stock Kernel, even with performance governor. Because it lacks all the tweaks this one has. All that has to be done right now is this bug fixing.

As you add the tweaks bit by bit, I will test the new releases and tell you how it's going. And one last note, if it is even possible, if you have the time for it, try to make it possible to tune the frequencies of the single/dual and quad core frequencies of the big cores. Because as of now it is basically impossible to overclock them and gain multi core improvements. That is honestly my only request together with a revision of the thermal and power throttling systems, because they appear to be interfering with my Kernel settings (Little CPU max frequency, GPU frequency irreversibly. Throttling threshold APPEARS to be at 70°C on CPU. Making it tunable would be great.). The current governors for the Mali GPU also are super conservative (and raising minimum frequency to 572MHz doesn't affect the GPU's behaviour, as it ignores it and goes at the frequency it wants AS SOON as I enter a game), just like Mali GPUs in general. Performance governor would make gaming buttery smooth when used. There is a lot of work to do, but this is just the very beginning, you have been back in the game for what, 2 months? And you have already done all of this. You can do great things. Believe in the potential of this Exynos 9810 because it does have it. It's all about pulling it out. And I'm glad to see I can free your schedule a bit. Again, good luck with everything mate.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
no problem and thanks mate

and regarding the time needed to pump up the cpu, there has been some tunings deployed for the 9810 custom kernels like reducing the number of cycles or time per wait etc, so it should be quicker than the stock one. also for the gpu, try changing the interactive governor settings as to when to push it up and at which freq

i am currently working on updating the file system stuff and it's almost done. once it's finished, together with a few basic stuffs i will go back to the cpu, gpu and freq things since they can affect the overall performance badly. so i don want to build on top of these like before where i have to redo most of the changes in case of problems arise

once again thanks for your help
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
20210920 - v2.11c6 released

for fuf5 and fuh1 respectively
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] moderndaycowboy:
FUF5 V2.11c6

using SM-N960F

reading speed is decreased.

writing speed is increased.

multicore performance is slightly increased..
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
thanks for reporting

just learned that it may be due to a bug with ext4 but not get patched in linux 4.9

let me check
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] moderndaycowboy:
You're welcome, overall Performance seems to be equal than before. Decreasing read speed doesn't feel bulkier than previous version.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
As expected the performance is the same as before. I don't usually do storage benchmarks for non F2FS platforms because they will be obviously not as fast as they can possibly be. Not much else to say. These are pretty useful tweaks though. Keep it up man.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
I wonder what does FUH1 and FUF5 mean though. I don't know which one to flash
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
goto dialer, type *#1234# and read AP
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
glad to hear at least it performs on par with the previous one, as more and more features added the performance could be affeced especially some tracing functions have been introduced

anyway, thanks for you guys' time as i cannot check every aspects every time i release a new version. of coz i would like to see perfomance gain each time but it's not guaranteed. so keep me informed or otherwise we wouldnt have a revised version based on the previous built which out performed as much as 30%

so pls continue to provide me feedbacks and tell me if you like it

thanks
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] amit_coolcampus:
I am using this version since yesterday night, and it's definitely working well. Less heating and screen used to get non-responsive with the earlier version. But no such case with the newer version so far.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Either way, the same previously known issues remain, and they can be quite bad for gaming and work performance. I'll do the usual summary.

1: CPU only goes to 2886MHz in single core (I have found 2964MHz as maximum frequency in the sys files but it isn't in the freq table so it isn't used for single core). Dual core and Quad Core are at 2314MHz and 1794MHz respectively. Pushing Dual at 2496 or 2652MHz and Quad at 2314MHz will dramatically increase performance at a moderate battery life cost (2314MHz was originally the intended Quad Core mode frequency of the 9810, and in fact, above that, diminishing returns suddenly appear.).

2: System throttles at 70°C. It is an extremely conservative choice considering we are overclocking a phone. Throttling causes a bug that makes the user unable to reach 2002MHz on small cores (Hard caps at 1950MHz even if I try to change in hKTweaks). Same for GPU, but the hard cap frequency varies there. Putting 90°C is a good balance between safety and maximum possible performance.

3: GPU frequency just does whatever it wants. Rising the minimum frequency to anything higher than 260MHz in an attempt to get more gaming performance doesn't work. Boost frequency threshold at 15% doesn't seem to make the GPU boost aggressively either.

4: If the GPU overclock is ever enabled again, it seems that there is a 775MHz frequency in the table. It would bring huge benefits to gaming. 598MHz is meh. It's just an extra 26MHz so.

That's all. The first 3 are bugs. The last one is just a suggestion.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
you mean compared with 2.10?

i didnt notice any huge differences except better battery consumption, could be due to there were too many internal builts for self testing, but it's a bump for you guys with about 10 builts skipped 😄
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] amit_coolcampus:
Yes 2.10 vs 2.11. My phone used to get over heated and then no response on touch. I dont know why. But it was random, normally it worked fine. Once touch was non-responsive, then only hard restart was the way. This one is working fine, fingers crossed.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
will look into these as i mentioned before since this one was focused on the file system updates. hopefully we can push it further after the ext4 problem just mentioned got fixed
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
that's weird.... i have never faced that kind of problems before even with test builds. could it be dirty flashing custom roms?

anyway, glad to hear it finally get solved
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] amit_coolcampus:
No dirty flashing. But I am happy to continue with the current one. Many thanks. 🙂
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Also to add that while trying to make my phone use F2FS I got such a big L. Thank God I had backups. I had changed system, cache and data to F2FS. So I formatted the phone. Tried to boot like an idiot forgetting I had...deleted the damn system with the conversion LMAO. I was on stock One UI 2.5 and Kernel Version 2.11c6. I have returned the partitions to EXT4 and also while trying to put the backup on the phone in TWRP I noticed I couldn't move the system emmc.win file because it's over 4GB. Making me unable to move the backup. Though I have others that I should be able to restore since their system is smaller. I am going to restore this EXT4 backup and hope it brings everything back to normal.

The bad part however is that the system_image.emmc.win file is 4.8GB therefore can't be moved on the phone. And having no system, I definitely can't move that. So what I wanted to ask you is that if the system.ext4.win files will be enough for me to restore the system. I don't even know if I should make the vendor partition F2FS too.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Well the backup didn't restore my system properly I suppose . It goes to the Samsung logo with a blue led for a while and then goes back to the Samsung Galaxy Note9 logo with a blue led endlessly. ykkfive, do you have any idea how to help me here lol? I would really appreciate it.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
I will try to move on AlexisROM One UI 2.5. With my phone unusable I can't keep providing benchmarks for your Kernel versions. Therefore I have to do absolutely everything I can.

Edit: Moving over to AlexisROM was successful. However being unsure whether it supports F2FS or not I will stick with EXT4 for the time being.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
so you have restored your phone now? i mean at least it is working properly atm ?

there are something that need to be done before going f2fs, i will tell you later why
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
Yes I managed to restore my phone from the soft brick status. The whole problem was actually due to a distraction mistake I made. It’s working and fine now though. But I am on EXT4 because I am not sure if the Alexis ROM 3.0 supports F2FS.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
don worry, all (or most) custom roms, as well as stock rom, by default will format partitions to ext4, so you wont brick it. on the other hand, your f2fs partitions will be reformatted back to ext4 when you install a rom. although it's not ideal, you have to live with it unless they change the way how they handle the file system

for f2fs, you will need to modify the fstab.xxxxx file under vendor/etc/ by adding entries to tell the system to mount the partitons as f2fs or otherwise the mount process will fail

i don wanna talk about this too much as it is out of my control and out of the scope of a thread talking about kernel, since this should be discussed in the rom's thread in my humble opinion. however there are some good tutorials regarding how to convert from ext4 to f2fs though

i hope you will understand my situation
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
To be honest as far as I'm aware for ROMs like LineageOS, you can simply format the partition to F2FS and the ROM installer will simply write on that since Lineage does support F2FS. And either way there are different setups for F2FS. Like putting only data and cache as F2FS (which still grants the vast part of the speed boost), while system remains EXT4 if F2FS is unsupported.

Either way yeah you're right and I understand you. I've already fixed my phone and EXT4 does the job nearly as good as F2FS in 2021. We can easily close this little parentesis and move on. You know the drill with my observations lmao.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
yeah you are right

and tbh that's why when i heard f2fs is rom dependent at first, i was so shocked. although i understood why later since the fstab has been moved from the initrd to /vendor
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] TechNoobForSale:
On AlexisROM 3.0 I've just managed to do 444.000+ on AnTuTu V9 (The average Exynos 9810 does under 370.000, and we have still got an incredible amount of room for improvement, for your happiness). PCMark is stable at about 9230 points. 3DMark on IceStorm raised to almost 50.000 but not quite. Held back by GPU.

I can't provide stock One UI 2.5 results anymore but Alexis ROM is close enough to provide results that should give an idea to Stock One UI 2.5 users.
[Samsung Galaxy Note 9 (Exynos) ROMs, Kernels, Reco] ykkfive:
444 vs 370? that's 20% 😱

incredible