Database Users

The ways to get full ICS on Atrix

There is a great description of the ways to get ICS on Atrix from crnkoj:
crnkoj said:
So lets try to get some light into it, the issue about hw acceleration for the atrix is that, even now that nvidia released proper ICS binaries, those are made for recent kernel versions (post 2.6.39 and 3.x versions), those libs are floating around and are accessible to most people who would want to build stuff with hw acceleration, the problem on the atrix however is we only have 2.6.32 kernel sources from motorola, which in term means all the libs floating around are incompatible and useless. Now there would be two general ways of fixing this: 1. get libs that work with 2.6.32 kernels but are ics compatible (most improbable, except if moto leaks them and is still to lazy to move on from the 2.6.32 kernel) 2. get or make post 2.6.39 kernel sources that have the atrix's proprietary drivers including or rewritten (actually more probable, but still quite low chances, except if moto releases and ICS build for the photon/atrix or someone knows, has the time and will to write these code from scratch for the newer kernel versions). So as you can see this is quite a grim outlook, its still being worked on by community devs as far as my information are up-to-date, but i dont know which aproach they are choosing. There is however a minor glimpse of hope, since the move to integrate android drivers in the mainline/mainstream linux kernel is happening in the 3.3 kernel version (there are 3.2.x versions as of now), so this might be actually the best bet, hoping that most of the atrix proprietary drivers will be supported in it, one could just use the "nvidia libs floating around", another thing is nvidia is maintaining their own tegra2/3 kernel sources, so combined with the 3.3 move to android drivers and nvidia implementing support for tegra into their sources, it might not look so grim for us anymore, but this is all a developing story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, there is another comment from one of the CM developers:
OK, since so many people are asking: The reason I'm doing the OMAP devices first is because the fine folks at Texas Instruments have, as before, published their reference code. (and Google's current reference device, the SGN, is an OMAP4, which also helps considerably).
The Optimus 2X (and its TMoUS brother, the G2x) is a Tegra2, and nVidia has, as always, published a total amount of zero useful lines of code; at this point, my time is better employed at getting CM9 off the ground with devices in which I can write code than it would be at figuring out how the hell to support old tegra binaries. It'll happen, but not in the near future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to this, there are some plans of CM-developers to make some kind of wrapper to use GB tegra binaries for ICS on GB kernel. Great!
Also, a question from me. LG has announced ICS on O2X. Will this release help us? I saw that some developers used O2X GB binaries for Atrix, and it worked even better Can we do the same trick with ICS binaries and get fully working ICS on ICS kernel?

v.k said:
Also, a question from me. LG has announced ICS on O2X. Will this release help us? I saw that some developers used O2X GB binaries for Atrix, and it worked even better Can we do the same trick with ICS binaries and get fully working ICS on ICS kernel?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can never be sure on the software world, but I hope so. A Motorola ICS release would definitely be better though.

Interesting information, thank you!

Easier said than done...
But thanks for sharing the info.
Sent from my Atrix 4G using Tapatalk

Hopefully something will get worked out. I have no plans on leaving this phone as I love the FP scanner too much

if i'm correct, samsung's galaxy r and captivate glide are both tegra 2 phones and they run on the 2.6.36 kernel, which supports hw acceleration to a certain degree, does this help us?

GT-P7500 owner here, a few questions about ICS

First of all sorry if this has been asked many times, I haven't found exact answers.
What is stopping GT-P7500 getting ICS stable and camera working as it should? As owener of this model I am very dissapointed with this model stock software and I am placing my hopes on ICS from any source (I hsve a modded Honeycomb which runs many times better than stock but still I am not happy since the best I found working for me was a ROM for the P7510 losing 3g support).
Is it Samsung not releasing drivers they should?
Is because of Nvidia not releasing Tegra2 drivers?
Or.. for example CyanogenMod team have all they need and it is a matter of time?
Thanks in advance!

First off I feel your pain but try and understand how hard the Cyanogenmod guys work. They provide an amazing product for free so patience is key.
That being said I have been running the p4 snapshots of ics on my GT-P7500 for awhile now and it runs beautifully minus the camera. Realistically you aren't going to use the camera that much anyways on a tablet.
It runs smooth and flawlessly and has really impressed me so far.
Find the link to Droid basement that gets you to the snapshots. Give it a try it can't hurt. You can find the link in this thread here http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1461240&page=140
I would post the full link but I don't have enough posts yet.
Enjoy!

Or you can try the Overcome ROM (forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1348533), runs Android 3.2, but is very smooth if you combine it with the kernel provided by pershoot (forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1138167)

Thanks for the answer guys.
My queries were more to find out if the delay is because Samsung's fault for not releasing drivers for the community.
Of course for the cyanogenmod team I have all the patience in the world and my utmost respect for them, In fact all my hopes are in the devs community like them instead of samsung or htc (I own a desire), etc. for taking care of the devices I own For me it's clear which is the priority of most manufacturers.

Sorry to hijack this, but does anyone who's used the current ICS editions for the P7500 know if exchange email works "fully" (with calendar etc...) when I tried one of the first ROMs, this wasn't working.
Those you have live/hotmail accounts and have it setup as an exchange account should be able to confirm this one way or another.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

You're welcome buddy i'd love to know more too, something will come.
Not sure about exchange haven't tried it yet. I unfortunately have to carry a second phone for work that's all set up with exchange. Its a Blackberry Bold 9900....boooooooo! If I see something I'll post it.
Cheers
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA

daniel_fm said:
First of all sorry if this has been asked many times, I haven't found exact answers.
What is stopping GT-P7500 getting ICS stable and camera working as it should? As owener of this model I am very dissapointed with this model stock software and I am placing my hopes on ICS from any source (I hsve a modded Honeycomb which runs many times better than stock but still I am not happy since the best I found working for me was a ROM for the P7510 losing 3g support).
Is it Samsung not releasing drivers they should?
Is because of Nvidia not releasing Tegra2 drivers?
Or.. for example CyanogenMod team have all they need and it is a matter of time?
Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We need propriatery video/camera libs from samsung to work in ics, with tegra libs that has the specific video/camera libs compiled in. So we need libs from both,my understanding in any case, and that is only going to happen once an ics rom gets released/leaked.
HTH
Sent from my GT-P7500 using XDA Premium HD app

Does 3G work with the CM release or is it wifi only? I have an unlocked Rogers galaxy tab 10.1 and would love to try out ICS on it.

3G works
I have a P 7500, and 3g works perfectly well.
So does the WI-FI, tethering etc.

I tried to have CM on my 10.1, but can't get it through, running AOKP M5 now on it, everything works fine on AOKP ICS, so you can try it, U will get addicted to it

exchange work great with milestone 5

L33t Masta said:
Does 3G work with the CM release or is it wifi only? I have an unlocked Rogers galaxy tab 10.1 and would love to try out ICS on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine is a rogers p7500 , using pershots ics dev builds. Works perfect. Latest build fixes wifi crash as well
Sent from my GT-P7500 using Tapatalk 2

CM9 News from CyanogenMod Google+

Last night, +Steve Kondik took to twitter to vent a little bit:
"CM has been getting a lot of crap lately for taking so long with a release. Guess what? It's not that easy. We don't just call something stable unless we mean it. *Also, RC1 is soon!* The most stable devices will get the RC first. The system we've put in place should allow other devices to catch up quickly. More details later this week "
Now to combat the obvious questions:
# As Steve stated, this will not be for all CM9 supported devices. The Nexus S and Galaxy Nexus can be considered safe bets, but the final list won't be available until release day.
# As always, the proper day of release is difficult/impossible to predict, but we anticipate a code freeze going in place tomorrow at the earliest.
# Yes, this means we will actively be running two separate RC phases (CM7 and CM9). Bug's should be reported to the issue tracker once the release is made, not in the comments on our posts.
# There has been a lot of talk surrounding Linaro in CM. While CM 9.0 won't ship with all the patches on gerrit, quite a few of them are already incorporated and others are sane enough that they will likely be there. There are still some issues surrounding the updated gcc used for the Linaro patches that don't play nice with AOSP.
# Nexus One: For the time being, the N1 will not be supported. We can get it to build/boot/run, but the hacks required break Google's CTS, so until that is rectified, you won't see any build with CM's official stamp of approval.

CM9 News
And from a followup a few hours later:
******
+Ricardo Cerqueira sat down with XDA recently for a developer interview
To piggy back on our comment about the N1 and CTS, Ricardo describes why we don't just shrug off that requirement.
Because it opened a can of worms that can’t be closed again. Getting it to work needed some very ugly workarounds that directly go against Google’s compatibility document for ICS. An app developer targeting ICS as a minimal version for his apps has the right to expect some functionality to be guaranteed on a device that claims to be ICS, that wasn’t (and isn’t) true for ICS builds with these hacks. That’s one the main reasons CM9 does not officially include a bunch of devices that are “working.”
...and some users understand that, but a lot don’t, and they’ll submit error reports on those apps, or they’ll rate it badly at the Play store. This is not a hypothetical scenario, it has happened whether we like it or not, asked for it or not, CM’s userbase is large enough to matter, even if you don’t count derivatives. We have a responsibility not to cause that kind of grief to app developers and we did. With all the mostly bull**** talk about fragmentation, we actively contributed to a break in the platform, no matter how small. That’s not a good thing :X People SHOULD know these builds contain hacks, but you’ve surely realized by now that they don’t
******

dookie23 said:
....so until that is rectified, you won't see any build with CM's official stamp of approval.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so.... is that ever gonna get rectified

charlie_su1986 said:
so.... is that ever gonna get rectified
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wonder what are the hacks he mentioned in the post. Was it the hboot hack, m2sd hack or swap partition...etc?

what is all the fuss about CM9 not releasing a rom officially when we have quite a few talented devs that have already given us the choice of running a near perfect ICS Rom on our nexus one?
EDIT: BCM offers CM9 features, AOKP offers us users the choice of AOKP features and texasice rom has a twist of its own features to. I do not see a problem with CM not releasing an official rom

Kannibalism said:
what is all the fuss about CM9 not releasing a rom officially when we have quite a few talented devs that have already given us the choice of running a near perfect ICS Rom on our nexus one?
EDIT: BCM offers CM9 features, AOKP offers us users the choice of AOKP features and texasice rom has a twist of its own features to. I do not see a problem with CM not releasing an official rom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't get me wrong, I love seeing the talented devs make awesome progress on kang'ing CM9 and things are coming together nicely. What I am getting at is not whether Cyanogenmod is releasing a CM9 rom officially for the Nexus One, but it's what Ricardo Cerqueira said about the hacks breaking Google CTS. This could mean that apps might not run or worse yet, FC's for no reason.
Now, the real questions are, what are these hacks Ricardo was talking about and is that gonna get rectified?

the hacks they talk about could be small stuff like ta camera fix etc since vendors do not always release new drivers.I would say that the nexus one is using a few hacks for drivers in order to make everything work better

I suspect it's a combination, both messing with HBOOT partition sizes (which is not a *bad* thing, but involves a lot more risk than just flashing a new ROM) and the nasty driver hacks that the poor dev's have had to do to try to working around the lack of a Broadcom driver, since they saw fit to release neither a driver nor sufficient documentation. It's hard to see how either could be overcome for an "official" CM9 release. I feel like it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem; with sufficient dev attention things could probably be brought into acceptable shape, but unofficial ports will never have sufficient dev attention.
Disclaimer: I really appreciate all the work that's been done by everyone on all the community ROMs. It's a hard, often thankless job, whether you're debugging mystery driver issues on an older phone or trying to coordinate a release for dozens of different devices with angry, impatient fans. While I'd love to have an official, flawless ICS ROM, at least we get more love from the community than we did from Google

decoherent said:
I suspect it's a combination, both messing with HBOOT partition sizes (which is not a *bad* thing, but involves a lot more risk than just flashing a new ROM) and the nasty driver hacks that the poor dev's have had to do to try to working around the lack of a Broadcom driver, since they saw fit to release neither a driver nor sufficient documentation. It's hard to see how either could be overcome for an "official" CM9 release. I feel like it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem; with sufficient dev attention things could probably be brought into acceptable shape, but unofficial ports will never have sufficient dev attention.
Disclaimer: I really appreciate all the work that's been done by everyone on all the community ROMs. It's a hard, often thankless job, whether you're debugging mystery driver issues on an older phone or trying to coordinate a release for dozens of different devices with angry, impatient fans. While I'd love to have an official, flawless ICS ROM, at least we get more love from the community than we did from Google
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this post i would put the blame on google for not pushing the vendors for the broadcom drivers since android is open source after all but once again great works by our devs and thanks for letting us experience the latest versions of android on our devices
EDIT: i must admit that i have better devices to use than the nexus one but the community keeps me coming back for more
Sent from my Nexus One using xda premium

[Q] Kernel update/modification

I finally decided to ask a question that's been bugging me for a few days now, with all android development going around in a very impressive pace.
Now I am completly new to kernel concept so don't me too harsh if I said something wrong.
The question: Isn't there really a way to modify/update our kernel since we have locked bootloader?
As far as I understood, most of us are running ICS UI on top of GB kernel (even some on top of Froyo kernel) but this does not give us the advantage of running ICS on it full force and take full advantage of your harware.
I know Endless7 had a method to downgrade kernel, and I thought may be there can be a similar way to upgrade it.
With JB just around the corner, that would be a great improvement IMHO for our device.

Megalith27 said:
I finally decided to ask a question that's been bugging me for a few days now, with all android development going around in a very impressive pace.
Now I am completly new to kernel concept so don't me too harsh if I said something wrong.
The question: Isn't there really a way to modify/update our kernel since we have locked bootloader?
As far as I understood, most of us are running ICS UI on top of GB kernel (even some on top of Froyo kernel) but this does not give us the advantage of running ICS on it full force and take full advantage of your harware.
I know Endless7 had a method to downgrade kernel, and I thought may be there can be a similar way to upgrade it.
With JB just around the corner, that would be a great improvement IMHO for our device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm no expert but I think this has to be done by motorola, since the kernel is the one responsible for the hardware management, and given the bootloader is locked we can't put custom kernels in our phone

Caesarivs said:
I'm no expert but I think this has to be done by motorola, since the kernel is the one responsible for the hardware management, and given the bootloader is locked we can't put custom kernels in our phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply. I do realize that and as Moto stated clearly that MS2 will not see official ICS there is not hope to get it from Moto.
But I thought maybe it can be ported from other device, or some modules, which share same CPU.
I am pretty sure our devs have looked into this but since we even got HWA working lol anything is possible these days.

There is a new bootloader hijacker called kexec which allows loading custom kernels. Hashcode is doing it for the Droid 3, and if I'm not wrong, it's designed specially for Motorola Phones with locked bootloaders. But you have to implement new drivers for video and such, so it's a lot of work.
Sent from my XT860 using xda app-developers app

elleypo Ière
Megalith27 said:
Thanks for the reply. I do realize that and as Moto stated clearly that MS2 will not see official ICS there is not hope to get it from Moto.
But I thought maybe it can be ported from other device, or some modules, which share same CPU.
I am pretty sure our devs have looked into this but since we even got HWA working lol anything is possible these days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is that it's not *only* a "same cpu" problem, it's the whole hardware solution.... camera, sound, gpu, and so on.
It's one of the reasons the dev on MS2 is so "slow", with the locked bootloader, non support from Motorola, the multiple versions (Droid2/Droid2 Global, MS2 EU/CH/NA and so on), getting the hardware to work (specially with newer android like ICS/JB is/was a pain, and most of the work was done "porting" those from the Defy/Atrix and so on who have, somewhat, partially the same hardware and can be adapted.
On top of that, changing the kernel as already said would mean to find a security flaw/hole in the bootloader that could be exploited for that.
(the downgrade solution was patched/fixed with the latest european, and now Latin America bootloader/kernel upgrades if i remember well, hence why most europeans who upgraded to the latest OTA don't really have a working CM7, since it requires to flash fixed sbf and other things to make it work (a patched recovery partition i think)).
But really, having the dev (forgot his name, danthingyabak ) getting full HW acceleration, and a working ICS port and pretty much everything working now, while LA and China starts getting remotely the same versions, we might see more develeoppement coming, since it's no longer "region specific" devs. Maybe even one day Droid 2/Droid 2 Global and MS will share the same developpements, who knows (or, maybe by Miracle, now that Google owns Motorola, maybe one day we will see unlocked bootloaders for all phone yeah i'm dreaming ).

What about us now?!
http://androidcommunity.com/motorola-finally-unlocking-bootloaders-for-real-this-time-20120726/

I hope it's true!
PS. But if it's not about us again, we hope that this method will work even be

xenusr said:
I hope it's true!
PS. But if it's not about us again, we hope that this method will work even be
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that thing was just a false alarm...or early celebration...
Sent from my MotoA953

Looks like we're finally getting there
http://androidcommunity.com/motorol...live-finally-can-unlock-bootloaders-20120817/

NVDIA TEGRA Documentation to be Released

Will this help development of ICS and JB ROMS? http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/23/nvidia-to-offer-up-documentation-for-tegra-graphics-core/
This should solve the video camera issues and other issues I think.
It's the documentation for the Tegra chips.

Looks like a good news and a bit of light for ICS+JB for our Atrix. Lets keep waiting...

No idea, but good find nevertheless.

Assuming this is released, what else will be needed to release a stable CM9?

It really depends on whats is going to be released. We don't know if its going to be useful yet.
Sent from my MB860 using xda app-developers app

Yeah it will help even to make better kernels, is a shame that my Atrix touchscreen died totally two days ago (thread reported will move soon, does not belong here).

RAFAMP said:
Assuming this is released, what else will be needed to release a stable CM9?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once Tegra2 graphic driver source is released, Atrix devs then just simply update and compile the expecting module (.ko file) to put into the kernel of their roms

hainguyen273 said:
Once Tegra2 graphic driver source is released, Atrix devs then just simply update and compile the expecting module (.ko file) to put into the kernel of their roms
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for your replies, guys!
So, with the graphics drivers into the kernel we would get 100% working roms?

RAFAMP said:
Thank you for your replies, guys!
So, with the graphics drivers into the kernel we would get 100% working roms?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.

fviero said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope it's soon then!

hainguyen273 said:
Once Tegra2 graphic driver source is released, Atrix devs then just simply update and compile the expecting module (.ko file) to put into the kernel of their roms
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not particularly knowledgable about the ins and outs of Nvidia's modules so I might be wrong here, but I seem to recall a dev on this forum saying that is wasn't just a matter of the binaries being compiled against a different kernel (which could be worked around if it was just version checking), but that it depends upon functionality that only exists in newer kernel versions.
If somebody on this forum were skilled enough/had the time to donate to port the Nvidia 3.1.10 sources to the Atrix, we could have fully functional ICS/JB today. But it's not reasonable to expect the few skilled kernel devs here to make up for Motorola's slack.
Over in the One X forum, richardtrip has ported the reference 3.1.10 kernel using only a few bits of hTC code for the camera, so it is certainly possible for somebody without 'inside knowledge' to do, but it has taken him months of hard work. (we're on 2.6.39 'till hTC's official jellybean drops, which uses a 3.1.10 kernel anyway)

Well.. there is still the matter of the fingerprint scanner beyond the kernel. But we can't get too greedy now can we?

thantos said:
Well.. there is still the matter of the fingerprint scanner beyond the kernel. But we can't get too greedy now can we?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The phone would probably be functional without a fingerprint driver, though.

This is not kernel module source they are releasing; they are just saying they are willing to provide more information to the opensource community. NVIDIA has recently indicated they may provide documentation to those working on the nouveau drivers (opensource NVIDIA PC drivers); under an NDA. Meaning that they will provide the documentation to those that work on the opensource driver but not allow the information to be shared. For this to be helpful we would need the documentation provided to someone who is working on opensource Tegra drivers; which I do not believe there is anyone. So this would probably be picked up by those working on the nouveau drivers. Best case if all the information is provided and they decide to work on it it would probably be at least a year before we would have anything stable for use.

thantos said:
Well.. there is still the matter of the fingerprint scanner beyond the kernel. But we can't get too greedy now can we?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, same for the lapdock.
Enviado desde mi MB860 usando Tapatalk 2