Database Users

How to maximize Program memory?

Been doing research on how memory works in WM5. Very interesting stuff. I have a 2GB Mini-SD which I put most of my apps on in hope of being able to maximize my program performance. Is there a way to increase the amount of Program RAM the device uses?
MemMaid looks like it supports re-allocating available Storage RAM to Program RAM, but the slider doesn't move. I guess it was only for WM2k3
Is there a way in WM5?
thanks,
casemon

casemon said:
Been doing research on how memory works in WM5. Very interesting stuff. I have a 2GB Mini-SD which I put most of my apps on in hope of being able to maximize my program performance. Is there a way to increase the amount of Program RAM the device uses?
MemMaid looks like it supports re-allocating available Storage RAM to Program RAM, but the slider doesn't move. I guess it was only for WM2k3
Is there a way in WM5?
thanks,
casemon
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't relocate anything from WM5 RAM because it's not used for storing files any more. Therefore, the 'traditional' ways of relocating stuff are simply not needed.
You can only play with what Today plug-ins you have, what apps you use (for example, Web browsers have very different memory consumption at rendering pages), what apps you auto-start. That's the only way to have some influence on the RAM usage of your WM5 device.

If you have a look around on yahoo there are some sites where u can have the RAM upgraded to 128mb instead of 64mb. Last time i checked though it cost around £140 and you also have to send ya phone off for 2 weeks for them to do it.

Simple questions on memory allocation

It took me a while to realize I'm confused, but it seems I'm confused about Hermes/WM5 memory allocation.
I've been using PocketPC's since PPC2000, there (and in PPC2002, PPC2003) the o/s resides in flash, and RAM is partitioned between storage and program memory. Thus, loading lots of applications to the device reduces the amount of program memory available for actually running programs. Those o/s had a slider to influence the balance of memory allocated.
Since I got my 8525 I've been assuming that it worked the same way, despite the loss of the memory slider. There have always been indications that I was wrong though - I never saw the memory balance shift, and nothing I've done seems to increase the program memory. Even removing several applications from Storage and installing them in Extended ROM didn't help. I'd LIKE to free up more program memory so apps like Mapopolis can use a LOT of it....
My Start->Settings->System->Memory page shows 56.22MB (Total) for Storage and 49.08MB (Total) for Program. When reading about the Samsung "stacked" (aka MCM) processor I realized that none of the variants listed had more than 64MB SDRAM, and 56.22+49.08 > 64!!!
It seems like either "Storage" now equals flash memory (vs volatile RAM in PPC2003 et al.) and/or there's more the 64MB of SDRAM in the Hermes or something. If all 64MB were available I'd expect more Program memory than 49MB....
I'm confused - Can someone explain or point me to an explanation of how the Hermes/WM5 allocates that SDRAM?
TIA,
Richard

Hermes has Samsung KD5657ACA-D090 chip provides 128Mb NAND Flash + 64Mb Mobile SDRAM. See here:
http://wiki.xda-developers.com/index.php?pagename=Hermes_HardwareOverview

pof said:
Hermes has Samsung KD5657ACA-D090 chip provides 128Mb NAND Flash + 64Mb Mobile SDRAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks pof! That's the one I thought it was - but I'm even more confused about the allocation of the 64MB now. If all of it goes to Program, how come I only get 49MB? If it gets split, how come Storage + Program is more than 64MB?
Ugh, I'm confused
Richard

rsolomon said:
Thanks pof! That's the one I thought it was - but I'm even more confused about the allocation of the 64MB now. If all of it goes to Program, how come I only get 49MB? If it gets split, how come Storage + Program is more than 64MB?
Ugh, I'm confused
Richard
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
These sometimes confuses people...
But, the stated "Storage: 56.96" is the 128MB part, in that resides the whole OS, ExtROM etc. So in the end there is only 56.96 available for the system to use, plus the other installed programs that cuts it down to about 30MB free after a clean boot (that's just the way it is thanks to our lovely microsoft programmers <3)
The thing is that when you boot your device, the machine loads the whole OS to the running program memory and allocates some of it to important system files, that's why there is 48.80 total and then there is the rest running programs that take space, and about 30MB is free after clean boot on my device.
That's the way it has been programmed, mobile device programming is alot frustrating than on desktop PCs, so the memory handling is very important.
And don't mix those two when you said "56.22+49.08 > 64!!!", they are two separate memoryes. (56.xx being the 128 part and 49.xx being the 64 part).
Don't ask why microsoft excluded the memory allocation slider, maybe the older devices and OSs were differently programmed (memory handling).

gvoima said:
But, the stated "Storage: 56.96" is the 128MB part, in that resides the whole OS, ExtROM etc. So in the end there is only 56.96 available for the system to use, plus the other installed programs that cuts it down to about 30MB free after a clean boot (that's just the way it is thanks to our lovely microsoft programmers <3)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That much is logical - not all 128MB of the flash is allocated to the file system mounted as "Storage" - clearly some is for Bootloader, Radio, etc.
Are you really saying the OS and user-writable storage share a filesystem? That seems counter-intuitive to me, though presumably there are user-inaccessible flags to prevent over-writing system files. In PPC2003 there was a ROM file system and a RAM filesystem overlaid so they appeared together. You seem to be saying that in WM5 the user filesystem lives in a portion of the flash - unlike a portion of RAM as it did in PPC2000-2003.
gvoima said:
The thing is that when you boot your device, the machine loads the whole OS to the running program memory and allocates some of it to important system files, that's why there is 48.80 total
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you're saying WM5 hides ~16MB worth of RAM usage? Did PPC2003 execute O/S files in place then? I mean I can see that the o/s and running programs would take up space, but it's unclear to me why WM5 would report total memory lower than 64MB in that case.
TIA,
Richard

See also this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=278903

Got it
pof said:
See also this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=278903
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, that's got it - the MSDN blog links (that Lurker0 linked http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=1027392) at least squared me away. Lemme see if I can summarize my own questions:
0) Prior to WM5 most of the OS *was* eXecute In Place (XIP) - certainly on the devices I owned. Now most devices do not support XIP for most of the O/S so more RAM is used in general to compensate.
1) Prior to WM5, PocketPC "Storage" *was* in RAM (for user data), with WM5 it's ALL in flash. Thus there's no sense installing to ExtendedROM vs Storage, because you still can't free up any RAM
2) WM5 *does* hide ~15MB of RAM usage - because they want to. So "Program" really is RAM and it's just stupid that reported Total doesn't match physical Total.
I was tainted by my previous PPC exposure I guess. Half the RAM means that Mapopolis for instance will then always be slower on my WM5 device than on my PPC2003 device - half the SDRAM clock speed doesn't help here either (iPAQ 5555 vs Hermes)
Thanks all!
Richard

1. There are still reasons to use Extended ROM instead of the Storage. The Storage is required for many tasks by the OS, it is wise to keep at least some megs of it free. But, as you can read around, not everything is recomennded for installing on a flash card. Here the External ROM can be in help, adding the storage that is always accessible by OS, and is not used by other means.
2. You may call it "hide" but WM5 actually uses it. Well, the way it uses such an amount of RAM makes it hidden from the tools that calculate total available RAM. But that paging pool is a wise solution. For instance, Symbian OS 9.1 phones (S60 3rd edition, UIQ3.0) use RAM uniformly, and, as such, the same 64MB is just not enough for all (OS, built-in apps, user installed apps). WM5, employing the virtual memory, uses RAM a smarter way.

Lurker0 said:
2. You may call it "hide" but WM5 actually uses it. Well, the way it uses such an amount of RAM makes it hidden from the tools that calculate total available RAM. But that paging pool is a wise solution. For instance, Symbian OS 9.1 phones (S60 3rd edition, UIQ3.0) use RAM uniformly, and, as such, the same 64MB is just not enough for all (OS, built-in apps, user installed apps). WM5, employing the virtual memory, uses RAM a smarter way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed - by "hide" I simply meant not reporting it. I'd be fine with MS showing 64MB total with 14MB used - I just got thrown by showing 50MB "Total". I grok their rationale for that reporting choice, I just don't agree
As I alluded above, I have a specific target app which performed well on a PPC2003 system with 128MB of RAM and which is performing much slower on a WM5 system with 64MB RAM. Reducing the app's dataset (maps in this case) brings performance back in line, so I believe I have a memory issue. I'm running an older version of the app due to a bug which is still outstanding against the WM5-certified versions, so I'm likely not getting any help the app COULD be giving the OS. Bummer for me
On the plus side, I've learned a bunch about WM5 memory usage which I didn't know yesterday....
Thanks!
Richard

Program Mem (RAM) getting less&less

Dear All,
I run the O2 XDA as is w/ 4 heavy add applications, Navi, PIM, Wallet and Blackberry.
I start w/ 50% RAM usage after soft-reset. After some days I see 75%
There is either a memory leak in the applications, or DLLs are sitting there and are not unloaded from mem.
IS THERE ANYWHERE A TOOL TO MANAGE AND REVIEW THE DYNAMIC MEMORY ALLOCATION (RAM) ??
Thank you for info.
Regards
Hans Kurscheidt

lve0200 said:
Dear All,
I run the O2 XDA as is w/ 4 heavy add applications, Navi, PIM, Wallet and Blackberry.
I start w/ 50% RAM usage after soft-reset. After some days I see 75%
There is either a memory leak in the applications, or DLLs are sitting there and are not unloaded from mem.
IS THERE ANYWHERE A TOOL TO MANAGE AND REVIEW THE DYNAMIC MEMORY ALLOCATION (RAM) ??
Thank you for info.
Regards
Hans Kurscheidt
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not aware of one. The Sktools application has some useful clean-out stuff and has an option to manage running processes. It does not sadly show their %Ram usage figures.
Mike

Ram usage
Hi, thank you for your reply.
May be somebody else from the R&D side has something to say.
I recognised that the sum of RAM usage, as indikated by tools like SK or Taskmanager does not at all come close to the RAM usage indicated by System resources.
Hans Kurscheidt

Sorry to post to myself,
but I found out that after soft reset, Task manager tool and mem maid show significantly different memory allocation for the processes running after reset. For example filesys 2,85 Mb versus 2,4 Mb.
What to believe ??
All in all, I come close to 8 Mb mem usage for the processes. with 49 Mb free, I count 56 Mb. If the total RAM is 64Mb, where are the other 8 Mb? Can this be other code, copied into RAM for execution ?
Does somebody know, if the display has its own memory ?
Rgds
hk.

lve0200 said:
Sorry to post to myself,
but I found out that after soft reset, Task manager tool and mem maid show significantly different memory allocation for the processes running after reset. For example filesys 2,85 Mb versus 2,4 Mb.
What to believe ??
All in all, I come close to 8 Mb mem usage for the processes. with 49 Mb free, I count 56 Mb. If the total RAM is 64Mb, where are the other 8 Mb? Can this be other code, copied into RAM for execution ?
Does somebody know, if the display has its own memory ?
Rgds
hk.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Might be worth reading here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=286313
Mike

Thanks,
have done that before I opend the new thread, but there was no answer to my questions in there.
Rgds
hk

20080616> Can WM 6.1 have 64 MB Program Memory?

Requests/suggestions please for WM 6.1 cookers considering their next release:
- 64 MB Program Memory
- Absolute bare skeleton WM 6.1
- essential candidates for removal:
> customer feedback
> windows live
> any windows help & support related bloatware
> error reporting
> search
> windows media player
> any animated items, icons, etc..
> junk items under \windows; unnecessary gif,jpg,bmp,png
etc, text files
- single boot screen, no splash, animations etc..
minimize WM 6.1 boot time
- removal of other misc bloatware, vaporware that are not
core to the function, speed and stability of WM 6.1
======================================================
To the site Administrators:
-------------------------
- can we initiate a donation bucket in which people may contribute
and pool donations?
- 1 month period (or other) in which donations can be collected and
cookers may submit their best releases
- the people (users) vote during the period on what they find to be
the most efficient, stable, fast, clean and best performing rom.
- at the end of the period the donation pool is distributed to the top 3
most voted cookers, e.g. 60%/25%/15% respectively.
======================================================
Suggestions, ideas, recommendations, criticism etc certainly
welcome.
Thanks to all
--kara

64M program memory mean No WM.

why?
is there a maximum?
Thanks,

ks1781 said:
why?
is there a maximum?
Thanks,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you are really someone )
Trinity have only 64MB build in , how come it have 64MB program memory ? DId you have brain ?

--yes,
if the device has 64 MB SDRAM, why is it that most cooked roms
generally present approx. 50 MB of that?
is this a limitation or is missing 14 MB used for a special purpose?
Thanks for any advice.

?? because it takes up space to install the operating system.. even a 'bare bones' operating system is still an operating system..
did you ever wonder why there's space missing from your hard drive after you install windows xp?

http://www.htc.com/www/product.aspx?id=470
Memory ROM: 128 MB
RAM: 64 MB SDRAM
What is the ROM 128 MB designated for?
Thanks for your patience with me.
--kara

if i understand him correctly, he is referring to the program memory i.e. RAM not ROM. the 128MB ROM is meant for installation of OS (WM) where the 64MB RAM is the execution power. we normally get ~20MB-25MB RAM free out of 64MB total. i believed the rest (64MB - 25MB) was used for other services once WM started.

yes, that is what i'm trying to understand..
in this p3600 specification from HTC:
http://www.htc.com/www/product.aspx?id=470
it lists>
128 MB ROM
64 MB RAM
=================================================
for the 128 MB ROM
I assume the 128 MB ROM contains the OS installation, with
some component of this ROM hidden/reserved.
E.g. some cooked roms released have 'Big Storage'
~70 MB available to the user for NV storage
the remaining 58 MB comprises OS installation and a reserved
area.
=================================================
for the 64 MB RAM
This is the volatile memory available for the OS to boot & run, and
for program execution.
However, on most cooked roms I have used, under
Settings -> System -> Memory
'Program Total' is reported as ~50 MB.
So my question is - where is the remaining 14 MB RAM??

as dum as it sounds i've wondered about that too
even formatting issues aside (like how hard drive capacity is always lower than reported), 14MB seems like a lot to 'go missing'.
why doesnt WM even report it? because its being used by the system for services? so then why does it ALSO report itself using around 20MB of what's left?
that way, it's like 14 MB used (hidden) + approx. 20MB reported (shown) = approx. 34MB total? :/ hmm

ks1781 said:
So my question is - where is the remaining 14 MB RAM??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK - You have a PC with 1GB of RAM say. Once say windows xp has booted up - your AV started etc. you probably have 684MB say of RAM left, so Where did the other 340MB of RAM go to?
Think about it.

wtf i still don't get it... dont be mad
i mean mine reports 2096236 KB... a full 2048MB of RAM
BUT of course 100-300 minimum will always be in use for the system itself
whereas in WM, it reports like 48MB total, AND say approx. 20MB in use
ok so the 20MB minimum in use will ALWAYS be in use because of windows mobile itself. FINE.
but why does it only represent 48MB as available?
and if that is the case, there's that missing unreported 12MB, PLUS that minimum 20MB always in use
that's what im curious about

Just think that Windows XP takes 250/300 mb of ram space....
PS: Please edit your title... Someone could understand that you really have a 64mb free ram rom......

joncgde2 said:
wtf i still don't get it... dont be mad
i mean mine reports 2096236 KB... a full 2048MB of RAM
BUT of course 100-300 minimum will always be in use for the system itself
whereas in WM, it reports like 48MB total, AND say approx. 20MB in use
ok so the 20MB minimum in use will ALWAYS be in use because of windows mobile itself. FINE.
but why does it only represent 48MB as available?
and if that is the case, there's that missing unreported 12MB, PLUS that minimum 20MB always in use
that's what im curious about
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe it is for the Radio Rom etc...or maybe Microsoft are stealing Ram and stockpiling it....lol

This is actually a valid question.
The system has 64MB of ram, some how 14MB of this ram is allocated away before the OS loads. This leaves 50MB of ram left for the OS, which uses about 20 MB and leaves 30 MB of ram for applications.
I think everyone understands this part.
The question is, what part of the phone is pre-allocating 14MB of ram.
My only guess is the videocard, if not that then it might be the pagefile.

tetsuo55 said:
This is actually a valid question.
The system has 64MB of ram, some how 14MB of this ram is allocated away before the OS loads. This leaves 50MB of ram left for the OS, which uses about 20 MB and leaves 30 MB of ram for applications.
I think everyone understands this part.
The question is, what part of the phone is pre-allocating 14MB of ram.
My only guess is the videocard, if not that then it might be the pagefile.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does it really matter where it goes? Obviously if that memory hasn't been exploited yet by the excellent cookers etc in here....then it can't be of any benefit.

I concur with tetsuo55.
The reasoning proposed by Andych and others still does not quite
correlate.
i.e. 64 = 14 (OS) + ~20 (progs) + ~30 free
the ~20 is supposedly attributed to basic progs,
e.g. phone, filesys, mail etc..
A listing of such process summates to approx. 8 MB total.
That still leaves 12 MB of unaccounted for basic function
and userland process consumption.
Regarding the ATI video chip, general investigation and
settings check of tcpmp would suggest at best it is a
4 MB chip (whether dedicated or shared)
I cant see the 'remaining ~14 MB' that I'm searching for
being used for paging. Paging is part of overall virtual memory,
and involves page outs/ins to a location on some type
of physical media. Additionally, with the usual ~ 30 MB
ram free, in the context of these devices, a swap requirement
is unlikely given the 'free' memory available.
Although 14 MB may seem peanuts compared to standard desktop
ram configurations today - with a p3600 + WM, recovering the
14 MB (if possible) would provide a much welcomed bonus to
the trinity.
--kara

ahh now we're onto something good work ks1781...
i fully agree with the need to just find out the answer to this... most likely it's something that will be perfectly explainable and make sense and we won't be able to do anything once we find out
but it sure would be nice to know

OK I have the 'answer' - straight from a Windows Mobile blog - I'll post it here cos it's all straight to the point and interesting (somewhat) Link is HERE
The Page Pool
Applications use RAM in two ways. There is code that runs, and there is data that is created while it is running. On a NOR device, the code can run directly from the ROM and not be loaded into RAM first. This process is called XIP (eXecute In Place). NAND devices can't XIP, so their code is loaded into RAM and executed from there. If you don't have a Page Pool, this code is loaded into normal RAM. The Page Pool is a mechanism to limit how much code is loaded into normal RAM. With a Page Pool, we can unload code that hasn't been used in a while and reload it later if we need to. We can't do that without a Page Pool.
On a typical NAND-based WM5 device, the Page Pool is 4.5M.
The Radio Stack
Devices with a Cellular Radio have a complicated bunch of code to make their radios talk to cell towers. On some devices, the radio is a self-contained module with its own RAM and ROM. On others, the radio code is stored in the normal system flash. If so, it either needs to XIP, or it needs to be run in RAM. If it's run in RAM, that RAM is taken away from the system.
A typical radio stack takes 4M.
DMA Buffers
Some hardware can write directly into RAM without using the CPU to do it. This is called "Direct Memory Access" or DMA. DMA is very efficient and lets you get a lot more data transferred in the same amount of time, usually for less power. But it's best to set aside your DMA buffers before the system boots. This guarantees that they're there when you need them. PocketPCs have been doing this for a decade. But, back in the old days, the main use for DMA was audio capture. Audio data is small, so the DMA buffers are also small. Video, on the other hand, is big. More data requires bigger DMA buffers.
An OEM will tune the size of the pre-allocated DMA buffers based on what the device is intended to do. If the main goal is still photos, you can use a much smaller buffer. If the goal is recording video, it needs a much larger buffer. If the goal is video conferencing, it needs a bigger buffer still.
DMA buffers range in size between 300K and 6M. For a video capture device, it's likely to use around 4M.
XIPKernel
There are portions of the deepest parts of the OS that have to XIP. If you're on NOR, that code just XIPs like everything else. Not so on NAND. For a NAND system to boot, it needs to load this code into RAM first and then run it from there. When the system is running, it can't really tell if it's running from RAM or ROM, so it assumes it's running from ROM and doesn't count this space.
The XIPKernel region tends to be between 1.5 and 2M.
The Frame Buffer
There is a chunk of RAM set aside to hold everything that's on the screen. (If you want to know more about it, read this.) On most devices, every dot on the screen needs two bytes. A typical Pocket PC has 240x320 dots. That would be 300K. If you have a 640x480 screen, it's 600K. Sometimes, for performance reasons, devices will have two frame buffers. So this could take up to 1.2M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Thanks joncgde2 - good find which provides a sufficient explanation as to the 'hidden' 14 MB.
There is still another question.
WM reports ~24 MB in use (per earlier screen captures) - where 'in use'
is attributed to running applications.
Checking a process listing via task manager shows the total
apparent RAM in use by these 'running applications' to be ~8 MB.
Can anyone provide an explanation to account for the
remaining ~16 MB??

[Q] How to determine the best PAGEPOOL size for a certain consumer behavior?

Hello to all of you.
I have read a lot about setting the Pagepool Size. I know the microsoft commentar on this and the differnet speed tests done by variuos users. Most of them not showing a big increase in speed, but a lot of people reporting a "smoother" UI. But finally all of this seems to be still a mystery for me,.... and of course for others too. There is no final conclusion to me how large the pagepool should be. My question is: How can I determine the optimal page pool size for my usage, without try & error? As I said, the benchmarks did not show a clear improvement, and UI smoothness is difficult to evaluate between the different pagepool settings.
As I understand, the pagepool area is only used for program code and NOT for program data. But the question is: Is this restricted to "user program" code or does also the system processes use this RAM area? If only the user programs are using the pagepool, can I then determin the "best pagepool" size for my usage by starting the taskmanager and summing up the mean RAM usage of all my user programs usally running during using my phone?
So for example if Samsung Taskmanager reports:
Opera Mobile 1,34 MB
Active Sync 0,43 MB
moTweets 3,89 MB
====================
Summary: 5,66 MB
Would then 6/7MB be the best pagepool size for this case? Or is this method inaccurate? Are there any experiences?
Currently I have the pagepool at 4MB. I use Windows Standard CHome with a light ROM. With these settings I habe 97-98 MB of available RAM. So my options would be:
98MB RAM / 4 MB PP
94MB RAM / 8 MB PP
90MB RAM / 12 MB PP
86MB RAM / 16 MB PP
...
Does Pagepool speed up also the programs or just the User Interface? And should I try 16MB? Or do you think this would be too high and therefore only wasting RAM?
Best regards,
Chris