yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Captivate Android Development] Clienterror:
I'll give it a shot, the only thing is where does that text file go?

*edit* Nevermind lol had a durrr moment.
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
You might want to apply that patch and builds yourself, or else wait for a new build from me. It seems to do fine at any given speed in stress tests, but locks up after a while under normal use. Changing from a ct-ng toolchain to the recommended CodeSourcery one seems to have fixed it completely for me, I'll upload a new build when I get back to my computer.
[Captivate Android Development] _Opiate_:
Has a 1000mhz step been added yet?
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
Only if you build your own, until I or somebody else uploads a new binary. The above patch adds 1.2GHz and 600MHz steps to those in the normal kernel. My local copy is more conservative about stepping up from low speed, but I'm going to try undoing that change since changing toolchains seems to have been the real fix.
[Captivate Android Development] Clienterror:
The only problem I've had so far is it auto rebooted when I was playing with it in setcpu. But I'm running JM5 samset 1.9e, so it may be different on cappy roms.
[Captivate Android Development] Sanfo12:
ok, just flashed this kernel over to the captivate, but not seeing much of a difference.

- On Quadrant Standard my past two score have been 1018 and 1000 even.

- On Linpack my mflops have ranged from 9.87 to 6 ish (depending on the battery level and setcpu profile).

Have I misread or is everyone getting around 1500-1800 score with the overclock and not the lag fix, which i have not flashed.

Other than that Ive ran several different apps and not once have I had a problem.
[Captivate Android Development] Clienterror:
Is this with added steps or the more conservative kernal you were taking about? I'm getting 2500-2600 scores with the lagfix and that first kernal you posted. I'm load up the new one when I get home :-)
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
New patch and binary. I have switched back to CodeSourcery, while some have reported no problems with ct-ng builds I have found them very unstable on my phone. Other changes aside from toolchain are removal of unused values from some of the tables, and tweaks to governor thresholds and step sizes when stepping up. The former aims to push the CPU toward lower clocks when it is not loaded, the latter to bring clocks up faster when coming out of idle.

I would think people getting 1300-1500 are using a lagfix. CPU operations are only part of Quadrant's benchmark, and even they are theoretically being improved by at most 20%. Starting with the 900-ish that seems to be typical for stock that only gets you around 1100 if it were a pure CPU benchmark. I just got 1010 w/ 1.2GHz added to the other frequencies, and 1067 with the CPU forced to stay at 1.2GHz.
[Captivate Android Development] flashman2002:
I have been averaging 1050 without a lag fix. I am not sure how people would be getting 1500-1600 without a fix. With a lag fix I am in the 2200+ range.
[Captivate Android Development] Sanfo12:
No this is basically post #38. I just flashed it with odin as pda and rebooted yadda yadda yadda. Get my max to 1.2 but only getting around 1000 ish on quadrant score.

Is the ext3 and ext4 more stable than the previous ext2 as far as lag fix?
[Captivate Android Development] Clienterror:
Ext2 is the fastest yielding around 2200-2300ish but also has the most chance of corruption (Although no one has ever reported a single issue)

Ext3 is the slowest at around 1200-1400 but is the most stable and have almost no chance of corruption (No more than stock)

Ext4 is the second fastest at around 1700ish scores and has the same chance as ext3 of corruption but is less stable.

I personally run ext2 just because I like to brag at my 2600 scores with my OC to my friends with android phones. But in reality the difference between ext4 and ext2 is almost non existent in everyday use, but the difference between ext3 and ext2 is noticeable but only if you're really paying attention. They're all WAY faster than stock.
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
I would not personally use a lag fix with ext2, nor any with the logoplayer init hack, since it does not block other startup activity while it does its mounts and there is therefore a race condition which probably causes the trouble some have seen. Also I suspect a good portion of the apparent speedup is that caching/write delay/other latency management methods are probably occurring in both filesystems when a loopback mount is used. I would much rather use ext4 or nilfs2 directly on mmcblk0p2, which was what I was doing until my most recent stock reflash. Only 1300-1400 Quadrant without OC, but it made my phone usable, which is what actually matters. If I wanted it stupid fast I would be using the loopback hacks or just mounting a tmpfs on /data.
[Captivate Android Development] raspdeep:
I would do this instead:

From

static const u32 s5p_sys_clk_div0_tab_1GHZ[][DIV_TAB_MAX_FIELD] = {
{0, 4, 4, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <--100
+ {0, 4, 4, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, < -- 200
{0, 3, 3, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 400
{1, 3, 1, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 600
+ {1, 3, 1, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 800
{3, 3, 0, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 1ghz
{7, 7, 0, 0, 7, 0, 9, 0, 3, 3, 1, 4}, <-- 1.2ghz

see the problem?

To

static const u32 s5p_sys_clk_div0_tab_1GHZ[][DIV_TAB_MAX_FIELD] = {
{0, 4, 4, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 100mhz
- {0, 4, 4, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3},
{0, 3, 3, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 200mhz
{1, 3, 1, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 400mhz
+ {1, 3, 1, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 600mhz
{3, 3, 0, 1, 3, 1, 4, 1, 3, 3, 0, 3}, <-- 800mhz
{7, 7, 0, 0, 7, 0, 9, 0, 3, 3, 1, 4}, <-- 1ghz
+ {7, 7, 0, 0, 7, 0, 9, 0, 3, 3, 1, 4}, <-- 1.2ghz or more stable at lower

which was what i was telling about copying from the 7,7,x,x,x
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
Did I entirely miss that the table is backwards from the others? I had though it very, very strange that you seemed to be changing dividers for clocks already used in stock, and it had even occurred to me that the table might be ordered differently from the others, but I hadn't found logic to invert the perflevel values on lookup. I'll take another look at this now, thanks. If some things are being OCed a bit too far it might also explain why I saw large differences between different workloads and compilers.

EDIT: Ok, after another look I'm still not seeing it. Your interpretation certainly makes more sense in terms of values of the supposed "dividers", but I see everything that uses that table being tied to the current perflevel, which is ordered with highest frequencies having the lowest indices.
[Captivate Android Development] raspdeep:
yup, i found it weird too and that took me quite some time to grasp.. but a quick test will show u its working like what i said.. you can test by copying the 800mhz table to 600mhz (instead of copying from the 400mhz table) and do a CPU only benchmark at 600mhz and 800mhz.. you will find similarity in speed..
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
Indeed, with your suggestions the ct-ng build works fine for me. I've been working tonight on another project, an update.zip to convert /data to nilfs2... later I guess I should look at the datasheet and work on adding more clocks, though I imagine the limited range of the dividers means that many entries in the div0 table will end up just being duplicates of the speed above or below.
[Captivate Android Development] raspdeep:
have you figure out why the div table is backwards? there is no indication in the code to be backwards but it works when table is backwards.

id hope u can prove my suggestion wrong

edit: i went back and compare datasheet with the div table again and i think my last interpretation was wrong. the table should not be backwards
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
There are two ways that this can make any sense imo: the table is backwards, or the actual divider values are inverted. It would make some sense for the actual divider used to be 8 - x, since this yields values in the range 1-8 and can't yield a zero divider...
[Captivate Android Development] Sanfo12:
So what is the prefered method to go back to the stocked kernel?
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
If you want just the kernel you can get the stock firmware from samsung-firmwares, extract zImage from it, and make a new tar file containing only zImage. Odin is very picky about tar files though, I find that ones made with GNU tar are pretty reliable, while 7zip produces files that I can almost never get to flash.

Did you have problems with this kernel, or did you just want to go back to something without the wakeup lag?
[Captivate Android Development] Sanfo12:
No didnt have a problem with it, yes the wake up lag was kinda annoying but not enough. I'm still exploring the captivate and working with it so i can get a better feel and i want to see what the lag fix is like with mine without the o'clocked.

I would like to have an experienced setcpu user give some details on their setup using setcpu with o'clocked. I came across many times when i woke the phone that it was running really low. I opened up setcpu and it was reading 19.2mhz whiched turned into taking the battery out several times (probably user error) and it wouldn't refresh on the widget as much as i would like. Any suggestions?
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
SetCPU is a bit funny sometimes, I used to see that happen all the time. You should know that on boot this kernel sets the maximum frequency to 1GHz - it should not be overclocking until you use SetCPU or some other means to raise the maximum clock. Without that, there are some differences in clocking from stock, but none that should matter in a CPU benchmark. This kernel is more aggressive about scaling up quickly on load than stock, has one extra step (600MHz), and is also more agressive about scaling down when unloaded. If you're benchmarking, though, it's going to stay at whatever maximum clock has been set.

I don't really know why SetCPU reports the speeds incorrectly sometimes. An important thing is to look at the text rather than the sliders. I can see the text update correctly and pretty much instantly if I leave SetCPU open and adjust the governor values via sysfs.
[Captivate Android Development] flashman2002:
Sorry to get off track about an Odin 3 question. I have flashed this OC kernel many times, I have also flashed JM2 and JH2 several times so I am familiar with the process. My question is why now would I possibly be getting this over and over?

I have made sure that Odin is open, usb debugging is enabled, download mode and zimage is in the pda area. I can't even load the JM2, JH2 or JH3 kernels? My mind is boggled at this time. I also found that I couldn't load without an internet connection, which is fine but is that how Odin has to work is through internet. Anyway, any suggestion about what I could be overlooking through the process. I am rooted and have sideloading enabled. Drivers are good since I have done this before as well. I will say I tried doing this all after a fresh Odin 1 click process so I was starting fresh. I tried this with one click root, as well as after doing superrooter to get root access.
[Captivate Android Development] cyberguru65:
I have flash back to JH2 using the zimage in the CSC area not PDA.
[Captivate Android Development] -=HOLLYW00D=-:
using the kernel from post #233 with the i9000 JM5 rom. everything works great, thanx! i do have the wakeup lag though.
[Captivate Android Development] raspdeep:
i think ive found the code in relative to setting up the PLL register.. Maybe that explains the unstability, the memory bus is overclocked. So testing just the memory will see a big jump in benchmark if u use my suggested table even at 1ghz using stock kernel vs 1ghz using OC kernel

Download Benchmark by softweg from market, test only memory, u will see it jumped from 600ish (stock) to 800ish (oc kernel) at 1ghz. the rest of the benchmark remains pretty consistent
[Captivate Android Development] -=HOLLYW00D=-:
not sure if this is relevant, but Asphalt 5 crashes when CPU is set to 1.2GHz. works fine at 1.0 though.
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
Yes, I already looked at the docs and edited the 600 and 1200MHz steps to bring the other clocks in line with their values in stock, also changed 600 to set APLL @ 600MHz and use 1 for the core click divider. Ran CPU-only benchmarks in Quadrant and verified that all modes perform roughly proportionate to their clocks, and have no crashes after those, running some full benchmarks, and compressing some large files, which kept the click switching quite a bit.

The docs state max for SCLKA2M is 400MHz, but stock uses 200 if I am not mistaken... maybe worth seeing what happens if we raise it?
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
Changes:

Fixed div0 table for all clocks and PLL setup for 600MHz. Added BFQ I/O scheduler, which sounded as though it might be useful for flash, although I still bench best with deadline or noop. Spinning this off into a separate kernel thread shortly, probably, but I can keep posting split-out patches of the OC work here if it helps people. I strongly suggest anybody using one of my earlier kernels flash back to stock or flash this new one, as the errors in the div0 table had some of the other system clocks running well outside their specs.
[Captivate Android Development] -=HOLLYW00D=-:
thanks for the quick update Unhelpful. tried out the one in post #254 and it didn't work out for me. flashed fine, seemed to boot up fine, but when i swiped to unlock, the phone just shut off (went to the screen with the battery being charged, as i had it plugged in). it did this two out of three times i rebooted (didn't muck around in the OS, just did 3 reboots and swipes). flashed back to the kernel posted in #233 and it doesn't have the above symptoms.

my config:

i9000 rom (euro JM5)

rooted

***EDIT***

running Quadrant Standard at 1.2GHZ, the phone locks up during the 3D hallway test. (with the kernel attached to post #233)
[Captivate Android Development] amerikian:
how to uninstall?

Thanks for the Kernel. I installed the one in the first post on top of JM5 + Samset 1.9e + Lagfix ext2 (oneclick). I got one Q score of 2700!!

But the screen lag and instability are a little too much. How do i go about uninstalling/deleting the kernel?

Thanks in advance, ya'll.
[Captivate Android Development] -=HOLLYW00D=-:
when you say you flashed the one in the first post, what do you mean? i want to try the same one but the first post doesn't have any attachments. do you mean you followed the link in the first post and used a I9000 kernel? thanks in advance.
[Captivate Android Development] amerikian:
ayo!

Here's what i did:

- Flashed to Odin One Click Captivate Stock Rom.

- Unmounted SD card and formated

- Flashed JM5 (without reboot)

- Flashed Captivate Kernel with 512 Pit File

- Set language (default is Russian in JM5)

- Loaded SamSet 1.9e to root SD

- Reboot Recovery and reinstalled packages

- Ran Util One Click LagFix (from I9000 forum)

- Made ROM Manger backup

- Flashed Kernel as PDA (From link in first post)

- Installed SetCUP and set values (this took a couple reboots to show the 1200Mhz value max

It was running great until i loaded the Overclock Kernel. Its totally usable, but the screen lag and bugginess outweight the speed gains IMO.

I reloaded my ROM backup from ROM Manager but the kernel was still there. So do i need to flash to the stock Captivate ROM and start over?

I do like the high quadrant scores (2700!!) and linpack scores (9.6), but prefer the stability of JM5 + Samset 1.9e + Oneclick Lag Fix.
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
Am I the only one seeing some reduction in wakeup lag with my most recent kernel? I am finding that my phone now often wakes instantly, and the longest delay is under three seconds, around what I remember as the worst case for stock. Perhaps I ought to look at the stock binary and check the scaling transition take it uses...
[Captivate Android Development] raspdeep:
you have been busy! are you going to create a git or something? or maybe setup something so we can share discussion and builds.. im not familar so hope that you are..
[Captivate Android Development] cyberguru65:
Was your USB connected to the phone? There is hardly any wake up lag when the phone is connected to a power source.

The lag only occurs when disconnected.
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
No, this is while unplugged. If I press power very quickly after turning the screen off, wakeup is instant. After it's been off for about a quarter of a second, the lag is consistently 2-3 seconds, and never the 4-5 that I used to see. Now if only I knew what I had done...
[Captivate Android Development] vendetta007:
i had noticed the same thing. i had assumed that the quick resume from short sleep was due to the phone not entering sleep mode quite yet.
[Captivate Android Development] rob989_69:
Unhelpful, I'm sure this was explained somewhere buryed in this post, but what is the difference between your kernel and Ajermans from the original post?
[Captivate Android Development] amerikian:
Still getting 2700+ without SetCPU

I loaded this kernel onto my Captivate running JM5 + Samset 1.9e + One Click Lag Fix. Before the kernel i was getting maybe 2300 in Quadrant. With this kernel i was getting 2700+. I backed up my system image with ROM Manager before i installed this kernel.

I didn't like the screen lag and other bugs so i loaded my backup system image with ROM Manager. I noticed the screen lag right away and felt really fast, which was odd because i didn't have SetCPU installed. So for ****s and giggles i ran Quadrant after the fresh backup restore and i was still close to 2700. That's without SetCPU installed. Still don't have it installed and running pretty good, except for the screen lag.

Right after i recovered my ROM my system was running faster than before the restore and still is. I was just about to reflash the stock Captivate kernel but decided i will keep the current setup and live with the screen lag.
[Captivate Android Development] rob989_69:
I don't think you really need setcpu, from what I understand they've replaced the 1000 clock with the 1200 in the kernel, so even without setcpu it should still be working.
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
The differences are the addition of 600MHz and 1.2GHz speeds, with the speed capped at 1GHz on startup, user init support, and support for ext4 and nilfs2 filesystems and bfq I/O scheduler. The user init is going to change significantly in my next release though, so don't bother doing anything with it yet.
[Captivate Android Development] rob989_69:
Awesome, thanks for the heads up. Any headway in adding more steps after 1.2 or getting rid of the wakeup lag??
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
The only kernels I know without wakeup lag are the SamSet and mimocan kernels. I have requested sources in the SamSet thread without reply, but that's a very long thread so it may simply have been missed. I PMed mimocan about it, and all he had to say was that maybe it was his tools that were different, and asked if I could send him my config and initrd for him to build.
[Captivate Android Development] dkcldark:
I've flashed and compared 2 versions of kernels.

The one is compiled by codesourcery

And the other one is by crosstool-ng.

And what i can say is that,

The codesourcery one makes the waking-up lag but crosstool-ng doesn't at all. :D
[Captivate Android Development] BoostedSR20:
Where can you get the crosstool-ng kernel? Does it have any other problems?
[Captivate Android Development] Zilch25:
If that turns out to be true that's amazing news :D
[Captivate Android Development] dkcldark:
I've compiled them.

Im using I9000, the international one, at the moment.

OC and nilfs2 successfully work on my phone. Thank you Unhelpful!

You are really HELPFUL
[Captivate Android Development] Zilch25:
Wow... hopefully Unhelpful gets in here and sees this soon. =O
[Captivate Android Development] mostyle:
Agreed. he's online as I am posting this so we shall see.

Is setting up the nilfs hard?

I look forward to trying this out.
[Captivate Android Development] Unhelpful:
It's not automated yet. I have an update.zip but it fails sometimes and leaves you with an empty nilfs2 filesystem on /data, which is really not worth much. I have also not figured out a way to make clockworkmod work yet, even with an update.zip run before doing any nandroid operations - pre-mounting /data does not help, nor does changing its /etc/fstab entry. Also if the nilfs cleaner is not started after mount, restore may fail because the filesystem will fill up with old checkpoint data that is not cleaned.

But if you follow some manual steps it's not impossible to make it work... although it appears my user_init hook method is buggy, so you may want to wait until I sort out the toolchain problem I seem to be having and build a kernel with my new and improved user_init. :)
[Captivate Android Development] IStern:
using latest kernel from unhelpful, flash and reboots fine, but then phone goes into battery display mode. ah well, back to the OP kernel...
[Captivate Android Development] TheTodFather:
Unhelpful, thank you...same wtih you too ajerman...

This thread was really fun to watch and see how it developed i followed a lot of this in the vibrant threads as well. Well I guess we didnt need mimocan im sure his help would of been great but looks like we got a few greats in here in the captivate subforum. You guys rock man. Hope you get all the steps and toolchain figured out.

Thank you
[Captivate Android Development] _Opiate_:
Im still hoping for a 1000mhz step to be added soon...once that happens ill be all over this kernel!
[Captivate Android Development] bryman27:
I think Unhelpful's kernel in post #254 has a 1000mhz step
[Captivate Android Development] BoostedSR20:
I would think the wakeup lag is the bigger problem...
[Captivate Android Development] KJPDX:
Flashed this kernel with no issues, installed first go around.

This was flashed on top of designgears SuperRooter mod. I ran into an issue after it was installed with the wake up. It not only had the obvoius wake up lag but after the phone sat for a long period of time it would not wake at all. I had to do a battery pull and reboot the phone.

I scored 2335 in quadrant with this kernel and a modified Ext4 lag fix mod.
[Captivate Android Development] shagdaddy:
Complete noob here lol, but how do you subscribe to a thread? I'd like to subscribe to this as well
[Captivate Android Development] jhernand1102:
Look up at the top and click thread tools then subscribe..
[Captivate Android Development] shagdaddy:
Thank you :-)
[Captivate Android Development] joedon3:
My wake lag has gotten much worse lately. I need to wake my phone several times before I can unlock and use the device.

Anyone else having this?
[Captivate Android Development] AJerman:
Yeah, check out Unhelpful's post. He figured out how to add the extra steps and posted a kernel. Rather, wait for a little bit and a new version will be up with wake lag fixed/reduced either by him or I.

Yeah, it had gotten really bad for me to a point where I wasn't going to be working on development anymore at all until it was fixed because I was so frustrated with it. I just woke up to the surprise of them finding a toolchain to use that doesn't have wake lag, or very little. I'm testing a new compile of the kernel now and one of us will post an update for you guys by the end of the day.
[Captivate Android Development] _Opiate_:
Does anyone have a stock kernel compiled they can link me too incase I would like to flash back to stock?
[Captivate Android Development] BoostedSR20:
+ 1 for me too...
[Captivate Android Development] _Opiate_:
I mean i do have a stock kernel file from back when i was using jm2 and had to flash the stock kernel over the jm2 kernel but Im not sure if that file would do it or not.
[Captivate Android Development] hansmrtn:
I think this needs to be packed into a boot.img so I could include it in EzCaptivate :D That would just be awesome