Related
as title...before is JPD/JPE/JPD
now is JPE/JPE/JPE! full JPE! (still not available in samfirmware, only in Kies)
Details:
VERSION:
PDA: I9000ZSJPE
PHONE: I9000ZSJPE
CSC: I9000ZSJPE
BUILD TIME: 2010.11.19 17:33:15 kst
CHANGELIST: 658398
Ram: 304MB
quadrant: 1042, 1030, 1031
(quadrant subscore: (total:1020) cpu: 1442, memory: 1832, I/O: 626, 2D: 302, 3D: 896)
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-no tweaks): 985, 1015, 1014
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-all tweaks): 1004, 1024, 1005
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-all tweaks)+lagfix(ext2-all): 1815, 1833, 1787
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-all tweaks)+lagfix(ext4-nj-all): 1784, 1753, 1680
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-all tweaks)+lagfix(ext4-all): 1634, 1580, 1565
Looks like samsung has improved the firmware for a bit.
Full rom for download:
http://www.multiupload.com/NTIT9VGCU2
http://www.multiupload.com/6KLVGQXOMR
(Thanks 糖滷鴨@hkepc and [email protected] for the download links for this new rom - ZSJPE)
For devs:
I have used cwm recovery mode to do a backup of the system.img of this latest ZSJPE rom
http://www.multiupload.com/A2YA7W4BAV
As usually post quadrant score please ..
vinceyeung said:
as title...before is JPD/JPE/JPD
now is JPE/JPE/JPE! full JPE! (still not available in samfirmware, only in Kies)
test it now to c any difference...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi would you be able to type this in the dialer
*#*#44336#*#*
and give the build time and changelist info?
thanks in advanced
give me some time to backup and un-lagfix first
vinceyeung said:
as title...before is JPD/JPE/JPD
now is JPE/JPE/JPE! full JPE! (still not available in samfirmware, only in Kies)
Details:
VERSION:
PDA: I9000ZSJPE
PHONE: I9000ZSJPE
CSC: I9000ZSJPE
BUILD TIME: 2010.11.19 17:33:15 kst
CHANGELIST: 658398
Ram: 304MB
quadrant: 1042, 1030, 1031
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-no tweaks): 985, 1015, 1014
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-all tweaks): 1004, 1024, 1005
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-all tweaks)+lagfix(ext2-all): 1815, 1833, 1787
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-all tweaks)+lagfix(ext4-nj-all):
quadrant with speedmod(k10f-500hz-all tweaks)+lagfix(ext4-all): 1634, 1580, 1565
Looks like samsung has improved the firmware for a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice, any chance of a system.img from a cw recovery backup of this rom?
DocRambone said:
Nice, any chance of a system.img from a cw recovery backup of this rom?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
how to do it?
vinceyeung said:
how to do it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i know now...i m uploading to multi-upload now
vinceyeung said:
i know now...i m uploading to multi-upload now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks a lot, i send u a beta of the rom i will make
DocRambone said:
Thanks a lot, i send u a beta of the rom i will make
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if i just look at the score between wt samsung did and hardcore did...
samsung's kernel seems wins a bit(really just a bit) when hardcore is doing the kernel individually...poor samsung....
but at least devs can make use of this rom to develop a better one
btw, my upload speed here is v low, just around 4X KBps, so u may need to wait for 1.x hours sorry
vinceyeung said:
if i just look at the score between wt samsung did and hardcore did...
samsung's kernel seems wins a bit(really just a bit) when hardcore is doing the kernel individually...poor samsung....
but at least devs can make use of this rom to develop a better one
btw, my upload speed here is v low, just around 4X KBps, so u may need to wait for 1.x hours sorry
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, i have had good go with the Asian fw, let see if this can bring some fun to sgs
GPS performance is improved from this update.
I have uploaded the system.img for devs to make better roms for us.
Have they fixed the browser with this version?
how can i test this?
Open engadget.com and go to the full website. See if it scrolls smoothly or not.
clubtech said:
Open engadget.com and go to the full website. See if it scrolls smoothly or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i cant say it's very smooth! the smoothness is acceptable tho (to me)
Here is a link to the full firmware.
http://www.multiupload.com/6KLVGQXOMR
Compare to indian ROM JP6 how is the perfomance. Speed ?
Where can I found the CSC for JPE?
Tempted to give this a go, downloading... slowly
Hi again.
Few weeks ago,goldenr posted a thread about ROM's benchmarks.
Now I'm going to sort and update it,let new member can watch it and choose on their own.
I'm welcome that you provide your ROM's benchmarks here(Cause I'm using GingerDX).
I suggested to benchmark it for 3 times,take the average marks.
Also I suggested to use Quadrant Advanced.
Quadrant Marks:
Android 2.2 ROMs:
Floyo v1.0b:
-CPU:
-Memory:
-I/O:
-2D:
-3D:
-Total:
Froyobread v23b(Final):Credit goes to Megakaban_
-CPU:3224
-Memory:814
-I/O:365
-2D:219
-3D:373
-Total:1019
MiniCM v1.0.2:
-CPU:
-Memory:
-I/O:
-2D:
-3D:
-Total:
Android 2.3 ROMs:
Hackdroid CM7 v138:
-CPU:
-Memory:
-I/O:
-2D:
-3D:
-Total:
GingerDX v011:
-CPU:3227
-Memory:810
-I/O:1127
-2D:169
-3D:348
-Total:1136
FXP017:Credit goes to Kaskade
-CPU:2306
-Memory:825
-I/O:1143
-2D:218
-3D:316
-Total:960
XGin 5.3:
-CPU:3123
-Memory:831
-I/O:523
-2D:217
-3D:343
-Total:1007
kuyaDROID v2.7.136:
-CPU:3200
-Memory:799
-I/O:513
-2D:200
-3D:334
-Total:1009
miniCM 2.0.6:Credit goes to ithunter
-CPU:3243
-Memory:822
-I/O:996
-2D:223
-3D:374
-Total:1132
We have too many ROMs,so I just listed the popular ROMs.
But if you have other ROM's benchmark,post it here
I'll add it to this thread.
GingerDX without OC, UV
Total: 1108
CPU: 3158
Memory: 804
I/O: 1050
2D: 169
3D: 357
Chris95X8 said:
GingerDX without OC, UV
Total: 1108
CPU: 3158
Memory: 804
I/O: 1050
2D: 169
3D: 357
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Total: 1090
CPU: 3030
Memory: 791
I/O: 1023
2D: 221
3D: 385
Very low 2d and 3d score for gingerdx sometimes more higher than this.
Thank you very much
Froyobeard v23b without OC, UV:
-CPU: 3324
-Memory: 814
-I/O: 365
-2D: 219
-3D: 373
-Total: 1019
Thanks for your help
google search shows me this
http://android-xperiax8.blogspot.com/2011/07/benchmark-tests-custom-roms.html
Noob won't go search,also that's only 4 ROMs and it's not the latest version
But thank you to let me set some more references.
sorry but the 1st post need correction. its FroyoBread, not FroyoBeard. Its Froyo with Bread, not Beard LOL.
LOL its my mistake
...
waiting for all the benchmarks to see what rom is better
My custom rom MiniCM6-1.0.2-X8
Ram: 92
CPU : 199
CPU float-point: 16
2D : 344
3D : 461
Data Base IO: 145
SD card write 22
Read: 76
Total score 1355
umm,Could you post Quadrant Advanced Marks?
Because the scores on the first thread are using Quadrant.
But thank you for giving the scores
Ok froyobread 23b DID it
Cpu:3752
Memory:813
i/o:482
2d:265
3d:375
TOTAL: 1137
Overcoocked to man 710 and min 691 on noop ...
Ok i got total 1140 (froyobread 23b) on deadline in i/o schedueler
now i am testing it on smartass module v001... and it is 1213 HOLY MACARONY!!
Update:Added kuyaDROID v2.7.136 and XGin 5.3's benchmark.
Request:GingerDX v003.
samyeung97hk said:
Update:Added kuyaDROID v2.7.136 and XGin 5.3's benchmark.
Request:GingerDX v003.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same quadrant score.
Sent from X8 using XDA Premium app and running GingerDX
ok,thanks
Update:GingerDX v006
Request:Floyo v1.0b,miniCM 1.0.2/2.0.5,Hackdroid v138 and FXP013a
I dont really understand why only for this devices but please someone make it work on the Play!
Link: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=20329850#post20329850
From xperia blog -
The alpha ROM will only work on three Xperia phones: arc S, neo V and ray. For those Xperia arc and Xperia neo users wondering whether they should try this, you are warned not to as the phones have different partition layouts compared to the arc S and neo V.
EDIT- Was meant to explain why it was only for those devices ; they prob have the same partition layout.
Nabeel_Nabs said:
From xperia blog -
The alpha ROM will only work on three Xperia phones: arc S, neo V and ray. For those Xperia arc and Xperia neo users wondering whether they should try this, you are warned not to as the phones have different partition layouts compared to the arc S and neo V.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that does not mean that a dev can not change it a bit to make it work on the play correctly.
im downloading the arcs build now to examine it
i would take al look on this.
Maybe i get it working for the play (would be nice)
nickholtus said:
i would take al look on this.
Maybe i get it working for the play (would be nice)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nick extract the kernel from the arcs build and try flashing that with your ICS update.zip
might work!
In the arc forum they confirmed that the arc s build works on the arc. Maybe it works on the play too?
directly flashing the files to play partly works, im working through fixing issues now
edit: ok currently stuck at : D/dalvikvm( 630): GC_CONCURRENT freed 260K, 4% free 9790K/10119K, paused 2ms+3m
s
I/SurfaceFlinger( 647): SurfaceFlinger is starting
I/SurfaceFlinger( 647): SurfaceFlinger's main thread ready to run. Initializing
graphics H/W...
E/HAL ( 647): load: module=/system/lib/hw/gralloc.msm7x30.so
E/HAL ( 647): Cannot load library: link_image[1908]: 647 missing essentia
l tables
E/FramebufferNativeWindow( 647): Couldn't get gralloc module
E/SurfaceFlinger( 647): Display subsystem failed to initialize. check logs. exi
ting...
happens for both sensors and gralloc,
from wich phone are you using the files?
neo v arc s or ray
DJ_Steve said:
directly flashing the files to play partly works, im working through fixing issues now
edit: ok currently stuck at : D/dalvikvm( 630): GC_CONCURRENT freed 260K, 4% free 9790K/10119K, paused 2ms+3m
s
I/SurfaceFlinger( 647): SurfaceFlinger is starting
I/SurfaceFlinger( 647): SurfaceFlinger's main thread ready to run. Initializing
graphics H/W...
E/HAL ( 647): load: module=/system/lib/hw/gralloc.msm7x30.so
E/HAL ( 647): Cannot load library: link_image[1908]: 647 missing essentia
l tables
E/FramebufferNativeWindow( 647): Couldn't get gralloc module
E/SurfaceFlinger( 647): Display subsystem failed to initialize. check logs. exi
ting...
happens for both sensors and gralloc,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That means exactly? Also did you use the arc version or the neo v version?
IE-coRe said:
That means exactly? Also did you use the arc version or the neo v version?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Edit: haha nick was quicker xD
oh i clicked the quote insetead the edit button. Sorry^^
arc s version, was first one i picked it means its missing something somewhere but im not certain what
But you where able to install it and it boots?
it flashes and attempts to boot but no display due to those errors, but adb is runnind (although i needed to slightly mod boot img to get adb )
okay... doomloard said he will take a look on the play when he is done with the arc. lets hope he can help.
ill keep playing also
---------- Post added at 06:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:45 PM ----------
my modified boot image that forces adb mode rather than mtp is available : http://build.streakdroid.com/bootic.img
maybe you can use neo v (did you replaced files in boot.img with some files from play boot.img?
what files would need replacing, other than for uevent maybe, ill look at that next
............
nickholtus said:
maybe you can try it with this kernel: http://www.multiupload.com/7K22QRYC05
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what kernel is that and what phone is it for ?
Hi guys. These days I got a link, where it's appear that we can "boost" our GPU with +100 MHz, which would be perfect for this phone, related to gaming. I really need someone to test it if it's working even on todays roms, B574 etc. It can be flashed with TWRP, but i'M afraid not to brick my phone (again ). I'd appreciate if someone could test it if it's working or not.
http://www.htcmania.com/showthread.php?t=1242642
D1stRU3T0R said:
Hi guys. These days I got a link, where it's appear that we can "boost" our GPU with +100 MHz, which would be perfect for this phone, related to gaming. I really need someone to test it if it's working even on todays roms, B574 etc. It can be flashed with TWRP, but i'M afraid not to brick my phone (again ). I'd appreciate if someone could test it if it's working or not.
http://www.htcmania.com/showthread.php?t=1242642
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Take backup before flashing, it has worked for me on emui 4.0. Also this device is almost impossible to brick.
I will, but you're sure it was working? I'll take a backup and then test it, in some days
I tested it in IceStorm Benchmark, here are the scores:
Before: 5662, GS: 5292, PS: 7495, GT1: 18.6 GT2: 30.2 PT: 23.8 OS:6
After: 5725, GS: 5316 PS: 7836 GT1: 18,7 GT2: 30,3 PT: 24,9 OS: 6
XePealato's benchmarks: http://imgur.com/a/iRDpD 5335, GS: 4960 PS: 7257 GT1: 18.4 GT2:26 PS: 23
Average non-root, not modified P8 Lite scores (from futuremark website) : 3514, GS: 3055 PS: 7346 GT1: 10 GT2: 19 PT:23
I think i did everything okey
Wgat I could do achive more performance: Run the latest ROM, unfortunately i'M using B574 instead of B594 or what's the newest I BELIEVE that with good devs, and modifications this phone can reach 5800! How ? Android 7.1.1+, new ESAL kernel, even more OC, maybe 600+MHz This phone is good, but.... made weak :/
D1stRU3T0R said:
I tested it in IceStorm Benchmark, here are the scores:
Before: 5662, GS: 5292, PS: 7495, GT1: 18.6 GT2: 30.2 PT: 23.8 OS:6
After: 5725, GS: 5316 PS: 7836 GT1: 18,7 GT2: 30,3 PT: 24,9 OS: 6
I think i did everything okey
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hm.. not that much of a difference I was expecting....I expected more, I installed it too and same scores
hi6120sft ale-l21 said:
Hm.. not that much of a difference I was expecting....I expected more, I installed it too and same scores
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can I get your scores ? It's a huge difference between the Stock and EVEN the Stock ESAL V2 kernel from XePealato
D1stRU3T0R said:
Can I get your scores ? It's a huge difference between the Stock and EVEN the Stock ESAL V2 kernel from XePealato
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Scores:
Before: 5655, GS: 5282, PS: 7456, GT1: 18.3 GT2: 30.1 PT: 23.7
OS:6
After: 5723, GS: 5314 PS: 7831 GT1: 18,8 GT2: 30,2 PT: 24,9 OS: 6
hi6120sft ale-l21 said:
Scores:
Before: 5655, GS: 5282, PS: 7456, GT1: 18.3 GT2: 30.1 PT: 23.7
OS:6
After: 5723, GS: 5314 PS: 7831 GT1: 18,8 GT2: 30,2 PT: 24,9 OS: 6
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You had some improvements, but I already had some modifications before I knew about this i'm happy that I find this "patch", I wish I could "OC" more That 1-5 count af, and those scores, maann, 100 is huge for just 1-2 min work Against the Stock, it's godzilla, totally new phone right now i'M resting AnTutu, let's see what I can achive there .. sadly, I have only 20% of battery, maybe this is why I got/will get lower score than normal ... Yea, I screw up something, not even getting XePealato's score in Antutu :/ maybe cuz it's newer version of Antutu, noone know :/ I just wish that some dev can make another kernel, and some modifications at GPU driver, maybe a patch, an OC, etc...
D1stRU3T0R said:
You had some improvements, but I already had some modifications before I knew about this i'm happy that I find this "patch", I wish I could "OC" more That 1-5 count af, and those scores, maann, 100 is huge for just 1-2 min work Against the Stock, it's godzilla, totally new phone right now i'M resting AnTutu, let's see what I can achive there .. sadly, I have only 20% of battery, maybe this is why I got/will get lower score than normal ... Yea, I screw up something, not even getting XePealato's score in Antutu :/ maybe cuz it's newer version of Antutu, noone know :/ I just wish that some dev can make another kernel, and some modifications at GPU driver, maybe a patch, an OC, etc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have kernel esal v2 installed?
hi6120sft ale-l21 said:
You have kernel esal v2 installed?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
V2.1 Beta 2 with GPU patch, this is what others said that I have...
https://forum.xda-developers.com/p8lite/development/kernel-esal-v2-marshmallow-t3451924/page47
I hope we can get V2.3 or V3 with latest driver and best patch possible .. I don't care about battery, I just want the CPU/GPU/RAM problems fixed i'm using Kernel Adiutor and LSpeed too ...
Hi. As the title says i'm requesting for MIUI 10 Treble. Thanks!
*Please move if wrong forum*
no possible create GSI Miui 10 ??
I'm working on MIUI 9 one atm but it's based on 6x which isn't MIUI 10 yet. Maybe I will change to one of the other ones, if they're Treble. But only when xiaomi.eu builds come out.
I can't even get the device past init yet, because I have a seamless device perhaps and it just kicks me into fastboot (we encountered the same issue when porting Treble to the Mi A1). Not sure what the problem is.
I also have an annoying issue on my Ubuntu machine where I can't umount the system image because it's apparently busy, which could be causing issues.
CosmicDan said:
I'm working on MIUI 9 one atm but it's based on 6x which isn't MIUI 10 yet. Maybe I will change to one of the other ones, if they're Treble. But only when xiaomi.eu builds come out.
I can't even get the device past init yet, because I have a seamless device perhaps and it just kicks me into fastboot (we encountered the same issue when porting Treble to the Mi A1). Not sure what the problem is.
I also have an annoying issue on my Ubuntu machine where I can't umount the system image because it's apparently busy, which could be causing issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what miui9 your working??
Yes,we need some different ui like miui,flyme to taste something else other than aosp
CosmicDan said:
I'm working on MIUI 9 one atm but it's based on 6x which isn't MIUI 10 yet. Maybe I will change to one of the other ones, if they're Treble. But only when xiaomi.eu builds come out.
I can't even get the device past init yet, because I have a seamless device perhaps and it just kicks me into fastboot (we encountered the same issue when porting Treble to the Mi A1). Not sure what the problem is.
I also have an annoying issue on my Ubuntu machine where I can't umount the system image because it's apparently busy, which could be causing issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure it's possible? Someone said DSSI can't be modified into a GSI.
fxsheep said:
Are you sure it's possible? Someone said DSSI can't be modified into a GSI.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not? Source please?
CosmicDan said:
Why not? Source please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I may have said something to the effect of it being difficult to do because of greater integration between system and vendor, since the DSSI can expect private vendor implementations to be available in /vendor that a GSI can't.
I do recall saying it was a bad idea to flash a DSSI on something other than the device it was made for (except maybe very similar devices), but I'd imagine that should be obvious.
irony_delerium said:
I may have said something to the effect of it being difficult to do because of greater integration between system and vendor, since the DSSI can expect private vendor implementations to be available in /vendor that a GSI can't.
I do recall saying it was a bad idea to flash a DSSI on something other than the device it was made for (except maybe very similar devices), but I'd imagine that should be obvious.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair enough.
Well I am hoping it's possible. Basically all I've tried so far is whacking the /system folder into a GSI, but I have a seamless device and it's not even getting past init so I can't see logcat. I'm not sure why. I've been diff'ing MIUI /system with GSI /system and nothing really stands out.
CosmicDan said:
Fair enough.
Well I am hoping it's possible. Basically all I've tried so far is whacking the /system folder into a GSI, but I have a seamless device and it's not even getting past init so I can't see logcat. I'm not sure why. I've been diff'ing MIUI /system with GSI /system and nothing really stands out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
On one hand, I've got 2 (technically 3, if you count my HiKey960 dev board) A-only devices. On the other, Xiaomi devices tend to run MTK or Qualcomm chipsets if I'm not mistaken, which none of mine have - both Mate 9's. (And the dev board, I have yet to get a working Treble implementation on it, and it would likely be API 27/P since it's only supported by AOSP master right now.)
Otherwise, I'd offer assistance - if I were going to do it, I'd start with hardware that's similar to what the DSSI expects, get it running there, and then start moving to dissimilar hardware.
I would imagine it _should_ be possible - someone managed to get somewhere with the Pixel P preview images, as I recall. I think I read that it was booting but still broken all over the place.
irony_delerium said:
On one hand, I've got 2 (technically 3, if you count my HiKey960 dev board) A-only devices. On the other, Xiaomi devices tend to run MTK or Qualcomm chipsets if I'm not mistaken, which none of mine have - both Mate 9's. (And the dev board, I have yet to get a working Treble implementation on it, and it would likely be API 27/P since it's only supported by AOSP master right now.)
Otherwise, I'd offer assistance - if I were going to do it, I'd start with hardware that's similar to what the DSSI expects, get it running there, and then start moving to dissimilar hardware.
I would imagine it _should_ be possible - someone managed to get somewhere with the Pixel P preview images, as I recall. I think I read that it was booting but still broken all over the place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fair idea. The Redmi S2 has same SoC as my A1 and is Treble, but there's no xiaomi.eu builds for it yet (and I need theirs because they remove some of the original device protections). So I'm working with 6x atm, next closest hardware.
CosmicDan said:
Why not? Source please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is from a P DSSI port
erfanoabdi said:
if you understand what is CLT it's nothing but a copy paste script
and we don't have GSI P at all
i used marlin system and vendor images to make this rom from lineage with many patches, hex edits and hacks
i'll make a guide for all i did on griffin later
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
---------- Post added at 01:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:09 PM ----------
CosmicDan said:
I'm working on MIUI 9 one atm but it's based on 6x which isn't MIUI 10 yet. Maybe I will change to one of the other ones, if they're Treble. But only when xiaomi.eu builds come out.
I can't even get the device past init yet, because I have a seamless device perhaps and it just kicks me into fastboot (we encountered the same issue when porting Treble to the Mi A1). Not sure what the problem is.
I also have an annoying issue on my Ubuntu machine where I can't umount the system image because it's apparently busy, which could be causing issues.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
irony_delerium said:
On one hand, I've got 2 (technically 3, if you count my HiKey960 dev board) A-only devices. On the other, Xiaomi devices tend to run MTK or Qualcomm chipsets if I'm not mistaken, which none of mine have - both Mate 9's. (And the dev board, I have yet to get a working Treble implementation on it, and it would likely be API 27/P since it's only supported by AOSP master right now.)
Otherwise, I'd offer assistance - if I were going to do it, I'd start with hardware that's similar to what the DSSI expects, get it running there, and then start moving to dissimilar hardware.
I would imagine it _should_ be possible - someone managed to get somewhere with the Pixel P preview images, as I recall. I think I read that it was booting but still broken all over the place.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
P preview can be possible, the two phones have the same processor,so itis just like a ported ROM that don't related to treble.
I just *guess* that the DSSI is similar to a Non-Treble phone's ROM. I flashed a bootable AOSP GSI on a trebled phone and it boots fine,but since I just replace the /system/bin with one in MIUI DSSI, the phone will directly drop to fastboot mode.
So the DSSI maybe just like all the nougat roms,that they use the vendor directly,don't go through treble.
If GSI-ify a DSSI image is possible, then I have some ideas.
Before trying to make a MIUI GSI,we could first get a DSSI Lineage ROM,e.g. Xiaomi MI 6 Lineage OS 15.1 treble. This is a device with unofficial treble,and the lineage rom uses a DSSI image .This situation is just like the Redmi S2 or whyred, but this DSSI image contains the least private vendor stuff.It's nearly a GSI image.
So if we first get it boot on a phone with different processor,then we could prove that crossing processors is possible.Then we may use a similar way to make MIUI DSSI go past fastboot.
fxsheep said:
This is from a P DSSI port
---------- Post added at 01:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:09 PM ----------
P preview can be possible, the two phones have the same processor,so itis just like a ported ROM that don't related to treble.
I just *guess* that the DSSI is similar to a Non-Treble phone's ROM. I flashed a bootable AOSP GSI on a trebled phone and it boots fine,but since I just replace the /system/bin with one in MIUI DSSI, the phone will directly drop to fastboot mode.
So the DSSI maybe just like all the nougat roms,that they use the vendor directly,don't go through treble.
If GSI-ify a DSSI image is possible, then I have some ideas.
Before trying to make a MIUI GSI,we could first get a DSSI Lineage ROM,e.g. Xiaomi MI 6 Lineage OS 15.1 treble. This is a device with unofficial treble,and the lineage rom uses a DSSI image .This situation is just like the Redmi S2 or whyred, but this DSSI image contains the least private vendor stuff.It's nearly a GSI image.
So if we first get it boot on a phone with different processor,then we could prove that crossing processors is possible.Then we may use a similar way to make MIUI DSSI go past fastboot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GSI is something Phh created. It's basically the same as other Treble ROM's - it talks to vendor through VNDK. He uses a dummy device tree though to ensure that there are no broken contracts outside of the Treble architecture pattern.
It is likely that DSSI's use stuff on their own system or vendor that are outside of the VNDK interface, though - that's true. But those are specific to the ROM overlay, not the core Android experience.
Indeed, the goal in porting a DSSI is to identify these things.
We (I) already have a device with unofficial Treble, BTW - I and another guy developed it ourselves. So Mi 6 Treble (a device I don't even have) won't help.
When we compile RR for our device under Treble, the Vendor is 100% GSI compatible as a result. The RR ROM itself needed no changes - we basically just added some build flags and moved some blobs to vendor from system. This was needed to even get *our* Treble ROM booting, though. The GSI's just happened to work automatically after that (minus some issues like camera blobs having hardcoded paths to /system).
In other words, we effectively compiled a DSSI with GSI-compatible Vendor with only VNDK-related build flags (and some vendor-located scripts to inject hardware blobs onto system).
Reversing that process is the key to port a DSSI to GSI.
I have diff'ed our classic non-Treble RR with Treble RR build, but I didn't find any leads. It's something specific to MIUI.
Maybe instead of replacing the whole system, I'll just replace the GSI framework and app packages with MIUI ones and see what happens. At least then it should get past init. There will of course be missing services in initfs that MIUI depends on, at the least. But hopefully no kind of DRM-like protections that block it from init.
I've a hunch that MIUI vendor has things that aren't actually from the vendor but for MIUI, which would be technically incorrect but a simple and effective way to prevent direct kanging.
With all that said, I do have a source of anxiety here - I need to be able to record and then script all this porting process so the GSI-ported ROM can actually be updated as the base DSSI gets new builds. That's going to be a headache. I don't want to be spending the rest of my days updating and editing a build script for MIUI GSI :\
Alright, small progress update (in the spirit of openness).
Turns out my boot issues were because I needed to recreate the ext4 image with file_contexts, which I had to stick together from GSI and my vendor partition with a bit of extras.
If I replace the whole system/ with MIUI system, I just get a kick into fastboot with no console-ramoops so the sledgehammer approach is out.
Instead I've replaced app, priv-app and framework with MIUI versions so I can at least get to the zygote bring up stage and go from there.
Ofc it doesn't boot, I will need to modify my rootfs at least and probably add some MIUI specific init rc's and services and the like. Thankfully I have an AB device so I don't need to modify my boot.img at all for this.
Stay tuned.
CosmicDan said:
Alright, small progress update (in the spirit of openness).
Turns out my boot issues were because I needed to recreate the ext4 image with file_contexts, which I had to stick together from GSI and my vendor partition with a bit of extras.
If I replace the whole system/ with MIUI system, I just get a kick into fastboot with no console-ramoops so the sledgehammer approach is out.
Instead I've replaced app, priv-app and framework with MIUI versions so I can at least get to the zygote bring up stage and go from there.
Ofc it doesn't boot, I will need to modify my rootfs at least and probably add some MIUI specific init rc's and services and the like. Thankfully I have an AB device so I don't need to modify my boot.img at all for this.
Stay tuned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Little noob doubt;... devs ported miui10 for oneplus5 and 5T . Then why can't we! And yea oneplus 5 is not A/B . But that we can discuss or try to rectify our A/B partition problem,then it should be slightly easy to port know. _just my little thoughts and yea im really confused
balavignesh s said:
Little noob doubt;... devs ported miui10 for oneplus5 and 5T . Then why can't we! And yea oneplus 5 is not A/B . But that we can discuss or try to rectify our A/B partition problem,then it should be slightly easy to port know. _just my little thoughts and yea im really confused
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Porting to AB makes things easier actually. I don't need to repack boot.img.
But that's beside the point. I can port a normal MIUI easily, in fact I have got it working basically on Mi A1 with minor issues (no I will not release it). But I want to port it on a Treble GSI base so it's more universal and easier to maintain - that's the challenge.
EDIT: Another update. I'm now up to the stage of resolving lib mismatches (i.e. native methods that MIUI adds). This is the hard part.
CosmicDan said:
Porting to AB makes things easier actually. I don't need to repack boot.img.
But that's beside the point. I can port a normal MIUI easily, in fact I have got it working basically on Mi A1 with minor issues (no I will not release it). But I want to port it on a Treble GSI base so it's more universal and easier to maintain - that's the challenge.
EDIT: Another update. I'm now up to the stage of resolving lib mismatches (i.e. native methods that MIUI adds). This is the hard part.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have seen that some huawei devices with sd625 are running emui. Is it possible to port it to our device? I had huawei phone before and it seems to be a bit more complicated than miui.
Btw. Good luck with miui port, you are great Dev
Wysłane z mojego Mi A1 przy użyciu Tapatalka
Mirdeusz said:
I have seen that some huawei devices with sd625 are running emui. Is it possible to port it to our device? I had huawei phone before and it seems to be a bit more complicated than miui.
Btw. Good luck with miui port, you are great Dev
Wysłane z mojego Mi A1 przy użyciu Tapatalka
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course it's possible. Just a matter of someone skilled and interested enough to do it.
Off topic, though. I'm not doing EMUI. I might do Flyme because I've never used it, but probably not because I am not experienced with it (I have been porting MIUI since 2012).
Once I get MIUI up it will include build scripts though, so maybe it can help someone else work on porting other ROMs.
Another small update: In order to maintain as much GSI compatibility as possible, some hardware-related MIUI features will very likely be broken. I had to strip their custom camera stuff out already, for example - so that means using your own device's or AOSP compatible camera.
OK, here's a technical rundown of where I'm at now (which is also a bit of a blocker).
Trying to get the extra MIUI resources (framework and platform APK's) seems to be impossible without replacing a large chunk of libs. That's a bummer. But I'll post the info here for posterity reasons, if not to catch the attention of someone clever and interested enough to know more.
First of all, we need to inject the new framework/platform APK's to the zygote whitelist. I do this by hooking the start of ZygoteInit.smali#preloadClasses()V:
Code:
# CosmicDan - inject miui platform APK's to whitelist
const-string/jumbo v0, "/system/app/miui/miui.apk"
invoke-static {v0}, Lcom/android/internal/os/Zygote;->nativeAllowFileAcrossFork(Ljava/lang/String;)V
const-string/jumbo v0, "/system/app/miuisystem/miuisystem.apk"
invoke-static {v0}, Lcom/android/internal/os/Zygote;->nativeAllowFileAcrossFork(Ljava/lang/String;)V
const-string/jumbo v0, "/system/framework/framework-ext-res/framework-ext-res.apk"
invoke-static {v0}, Lcom/android/internal/os/Zygote;->nativeAllowFileAcrossFork(Ljava/lang/String;)V
...this worked. Well, at least it got rid of the "not whitelisted:" errors on logcat. Still, even with this here, I get errors like this in logcat:
Code:
06-09 02:40:10.374 599 599 I Zygote : Preloading resources...
06-09 02:40:10.446 599 599 I Zygote : ...preloaded 86 resources in 71ms.
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils:
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Native Method)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at miui.util.ReflectionUtils.callStaticMethod(Unknown Source:5)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at miui.util.ReflectionUtils.tryCallStaticMethod(Unknown Source:3)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInitInjector.preloadMiuiResources(Unknown Source:44)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.preloadResources(Unknown Source:95)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.preload(Unknown Source:41)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.main(Unknown Source:252)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: Caused by: android.content.res.Resources$NotFoundException: Drawable miui:drawable/action_bar_back_normal_dark with resource ID #0x10020080
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: Caused by: android.content.res.Resources$NotFoundException: File res/drawable-xxhdpi-v4/action_bar_back_normal_dark.png from drawable resource ID #0x10020080
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at android.content.res.ResourcesImpl.loadDrawableForCookie(Unknown Source:177)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at android.content.res.ResourcesImpl.loadDrawable(Unknown Source:338)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at android.content.res.MiuiResourcesImpl.loadDrawable(Unknown Source:25)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at android.content.res.Resources.getDrawableForDensity(Unknown Source:14)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at android.content.res.Resources.getDrawable(Unknown Source:1)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.preloadDrawables(Unknown Source:17)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Native Method)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at miui.util.ReflectionUtils.callStaticMethod(Unknown Source:5)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at miui.util.ReflectionUtils.tryCallStaticMethod(Unknown Source:3)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInitInjector.preloadMiuiResources(Unknown Source:44)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.preloadResources(Unknown Source:95)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.preload(Unknown Source:41)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.main(Unknown Source:252)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: Caused by: java.io.FileNotFoundException: res/drawable-xxhdpi-v4/action_bar_back_normal_dark.png
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at android.content.res.AssetManager.openNonAssetNative(Native Method)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at android.content.res.AssetManager.openNonAsset(Unknown Source:17)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: at android.content.res.ResourcesImpl.loadDrawableForCookie(Unknown Source:429)
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 W ReflectionUtils: ... 12 more
06-09 02:40:10.448 599 599 I ZygoteInitInjector: ...preloaded 0 miui sdk resources in 2ms.
...that resource exists in miuisystem.apk (IIRC, might be miui.apk), which is whitelisted now and indeed on the classpath (I see it in all the dex2oat related calls elsewhere). But for some reason it still can't seem to find it - it's resources aren't "included" for some reason.
Back in the day we had to add framework apk's to framework smali (AssetManager or some such class) when porting to get resources included, but we're already using 100% MIUI framework anyway so that should already be done.....
Now this is only a preload error - system should still boot after that. But what's worse is this error later on:
Code:
06-09 02:40:21.360 1632 1632 W ResourceType: DynamicRefTable(0x10): No mapping for build-time package ID 0x10.
06-09 02:40:21.361 1632 1632 W ResourceType: e[0x01] -> 0x01
06-09 02:40:21.361 1632 1632 W ResourceType: e[0x7f] -> 0x7f
06-09 02:40:21.361 1632 1632 E ResourceType: Failed resolving bag parent id 0x100d0100
06-09 02:40:21.373 1632 1684 D SystemServerInitThreadPool: Finished executing ReadingSystemConfig
06-09 02:40:21.377 1632 1632 I libthemeutils: Theme´╝Ü libthemeutil.so load success
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : ******************************************
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : ************ Failure starting system services
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : java.lang.RuntimeException: Failed to create service com.android.server.am.ActivityManagerService$Lifecycle: service constructor threw an exception
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.server.SystemServiceManager.startService(Unknown Source:178)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.server.SystemServer.startBootstrapServices(Unknown Source:81)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.server.SystemServer.run(Unknown Source:266)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.server.SystemServer.main(Unknown Source:10)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Native Method)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.internal.os.RuntimeInit$MethodAndArgsCaller.run(Unknown Source:11)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.internal.os.ZygoteInit.main(Unknown Source:306)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : Caused by: java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstance0(Native Method)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at java.lang.reflect.Constructor.newInstance(Constructor.java:334)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.server.SystemServiceManager.startService(Unknown Source:135)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : ... 6 more
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : Caused by: android.content.res.Resources$NotFoundException: File res/xml/power_profile.xml from xml type xml resource ID #0x1170010
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at android.content.res.ResourcesImpl.loadXmlResourceParser(Unknown Source:190)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at android.content.res.Resources.loadXmlResourceParser(Unknown Source:23)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at android.content.res.Resources.getXml(Unknown Source:3)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.internal.os.PowerProfile.readPowerValuesFromXml(Unknown Source:9)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.internal.os.PowerProfile.<init>(Unknown Source:14)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.server.am.BatteryStatsService.<init>(Unknown Source:104)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.server.am.ActivityManagerService.<init>(Unknown Source:900)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at com.android.server.am.ActivityManagerService$Lifecycle.<init>(Unknown Source:5)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : ... 9 more
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : Caused by: java.io.FileNotFoundException: res/xml/power_profile.xml
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at android.content.res.AssetManager.openXmlAssetNative(Native Method)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at android.content.res.AssetManager.openXmlBlockAsset(Unknown Source:17)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : at android.content.res.ResourcesImpl.loadXmlResourceParser(Unknown Source:48)
06-09 02:40:21.383 1632 1632 E System : ... 16 more
That's a resource that exists in the base framework-res.apk - but it's not being loaded for some reason.
I think the ResourceType errors just before it are a clue. The 0x10 might be a special ResourceType that MIUI adds. But ResourceTypes.cpp is part of androidfw (libandroidfw.so) - so it looks like it will need to be replaced.
This means that a true GSI MIUI may be impossible libandroidfw.so will definitely be linked against many other objects that MIUI has modified, and who knows how many of them are hardware-dependent.
I will make that attempt in replacing the required libs after libandroidfw.so (a tedious process of elimination) to at least see if it solves the resources problem. But if anybody knowledgeable enough comes a cross this and can help, please do.
CosmicDan said:
Of course it's possible. Just a matter of someone skilled and interested enough to do it.
Off topic, though. I'm not doing EMUI. I might do Flyme because I've never used it, but probably not because I am not experienced with it (I have been porting MIUI since 2012).
Once I get MIUI up it will include build scripts though, so maybe it can help someone else work on porting other ROMs.
Another small update: In order to maintain as much GSI compatibility as possible, some hardware-related MIUI features will very likely be broken. I had to strip their custom camera stuff out already, for example - so that means using your own device's or AOSP compatible camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well we don't need to worry about flyme coz it has a patchrom project and it's still in maintenance.And since flyme updated to oreo ,we can patch an aosp gsi into flyme gsi.