Database Users

Will the Google Play edition of the SGS4 give us usable Exynos code?

Yesterday was the day the Google Play editions of the HTC One and the Galaxy S4 were unleashed to the Playstore.
This may be a bigger deal than most of us give credit to.
It could be the start of Google taking more control over Android back to themselves.
But... Those OEMS still optimize the Kernel to work with their respective Chipsets/Camera's and other hardware features.
Wich means the code will be optimized for example the Exynos Processor inside the Galaxy S4.
My question is: Can we eat the fruits of this mighty fine tree?
Could it be possible to use some of this code to transform it into something usable for good old GT-I9100?
I know it's probably wishful thinking, but nonetheless; One can dream RIGHT??

We would need an S2 google edition.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda app-developers app

Well no, the google edition is the Snapdragon version.. not the exynos version..

That sounded (sadly enough) completely logical, thanks.
If only Samsung opened up a bit. There is little for Sammy to loose if they gave 'old' S2 the hackers delight treatment.

That s4 has snapdragon s600. No luck for exynos source codes.

What we should take from this is: do not get anything with "own" components, get something with commonly used components. It will be rather easy to port stuff for such architecture (Qualcomm chipsets for example).

kokesh said:
What we should take from this is: do not get anything with "own" components, get something with commonly used components. It will be rather easy to port stuff for such architecture (Qualcomm chipsets for example).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, even if that means you are not getting the best hardware...sadly enough that is true
I was sooo hoping samsung would start caring, and just did the popular thing to do.

fejth said:
Yesterday was the day the Google Play editions of the HTC One and the Galaxy S4 were unleashed to the Playstore.
This may be a bigger deal than most of us give credit to.
It could be the start of Google taking more control over Android back to themselves.
But... Those OEMS still optimize the Kernel to work with their respective Chipsets/Camera's and other hardware features.
Wich means the code will be optimized for example the Exynos Processor inside the Galaxy S4.
My question is: Can we eat the fruits of this mighty fine tree?
Could it be possible to use some of this code to transform it into something usable for good old GT-I9100?
I know it's probably wishful thinking, but nonetheless; One can dream RIGHT??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
think google edition doesnt use exynos chipset
both use the qualcom snapdragon 600

Need help, I suspect my android version is faked.

Hello, not exactly new to Android or Linux for that matter, but this has got me stumped.
I bought a Samsung Galaxy S5 from China because the seller conned me into thinking it was a g900v. It turns out its a Sm-G9006v. Android says it is 4.4.2 but other programs (Sysinfo, looking up the IMEI) tell me it is 4.2.2. So which do I believe? How do find out once and for all?
There are other little weird things about this phone and I'll explain if you'd like.
Sent from my SM-G9006V using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

Here's some shots of system info. First two are from android rest are from sysinfo
Sent from my SM-G9006V using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

GeneralRikan said:
I bought a Samsung Galaxy S5 from China because the seller conned me into thinking it was a g900v. It turns out its a Sm-G9006v. Android says it is 4.4.2 but other programs (Sysinfo, looking up the IMEI) tell me it is 4.2.2. So which do I believe? How do find out once and for all?
There are other little weird things about this phone and I'll explain if you'd like.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The additional information about anomalies would help. As you discerned, the system information screen looks legitimate, but SysInfo reports a fake i.e. MT6572/4.2.2. Which is correct?
One way to tell conclusively would be to run an extended benchmark suite. There would be a substantial difference in benchmark scores between a fake with a MT class processor and a legitimate G9006V (China Unicom S5). Alternately, you could look closely at the system files to discern if you actually have 4.2.2 or 4.4.2. Or multiple irreconcilable anomalies would.be compelling evidence of a fake.
.

Looking at the status bar icons it is pretty apparent this is not an original S5. Or maybe the seller rooted his device and changed the icons.
Also, it shows up as a Mediatek based device (mt6572). IT IS FAKE.

Hellscythe said:
Looking at the status bar icons it is pretty apparent this is not an original S5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since you're certain, can you provide a screenshot of a known legitimate China Unicom S5 for comparison?
If you've never seen a China unicom S5, then it's premature to declare it a fake before we really know. A different icon could easily be something that the carrier or a localized update effected.
.

fffft said:
Since you're certain, can you provide a screenshot of a known legitimate China Unicom S5 for comparison?
If you've never seen a China unicom S5, then it's premature to declare it a fake before we really know. A different icon could easily be something that the carrier or a localized update effected.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's running a Mediatek chipset. It is 100% fake. No variant of the S5 uses a Mediatek chipset. Kernel version is also incorrect and Android version shows JDQ39 which is Jellybean. No version of the S5 runs on Jellybean.
Here is your requested image: http://i3.sinaimg.cn/IT/cr/2014/0319/1504933938.jpg sourced from: http://tech.sina.com.cn/mobile/n/2014-03-19/07359253359.shtml

I'm thinking this might be the phone you're talking about...
http://upnovo.com/?Wholesale-China-mobile-cell-smart-phone-cheap/Chinese-Copy-Samsung-Galaxy-S5-G9006-Clone-Replica.html

You're assuming that sysinfo is correct. And it is far from 100% reliable. I already stipulated earlier that it will be a fake if sysinfo turns out to be correct. The information page for the G9006V that you found after the fact is inconclusive with mostly oblique screen views.
The bottom line is that we don't know one way or the other for certain yet. You can cherry pick the evidence suggesting it's a fake if you wish. But there is no reasonable basis to say that the matter has been conclusively proven yet. The OP needs to benchmark the processor or another metric that will clearly distinguish between the two.
.

its fake, the android numbers is jelly bean 4.3 , the battery icon is a themed one.

Wrong cpu, wrong board, wrong buildnumber, a clear and obvious copy of a S5. Sorry for you dude. Try to get your money back if you can if you payed with your credit card because of fraud

Yeah, it's 199% fake. Get a refund if possible.
If you want to make it sure, try connecting it to a pc with kies3.

It's a fake, looking at the photo's, the phone is a dual sim phone, in china only the sm9008W and sm9009 are dual sim.

A fake..

Now here's the kicker, it has the heartbeat sensor, it has the fingerprint sensor. Do you think maybe the person I bought it from just flashed it with a wrong ROM?
Sent from my SM-G9006V using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

GeneralRikan said:
Now here's the kicker, it has the heartbeat sensor, it has the fingerprint sensor. Do you think maybe the person I bought it from just flashed it with a wrong ROM?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Despite a lot of dogmatic opinions in the thread, you still don't have enough information to know yet. You probably have a fake, but that isn't certain simply because a third party app says that you have Jelly Bean firmware and a MT processor. It's a fake if that information is correct, but it wouldn't be the first time that an app has reported erroneous information either.
Likewise, missing the heartrate or fingerprint sensors would be strong evidence of a fake. But the best quality clones do have working heartrate & fingerprint apps. The most damming evidence IMO is the kernel version which is suggestive of a clone. But I stand by my earlier advice. Had you run a benchmark suite, you'd already have a conclusive answer.
.

Proper 6039Y (4.7") vs 6045Y (5.5") signalling

Hello there
I recently acquired our beloved Idol 3, the 4.7" variant (aka 6039Y), and I couldn't help but noticing a rather disturbing fact :
=> Any information about the 6039Y model is diluted in general threads or buried inside the 6045Y threads ...
Would it be possible for everybody posting information/patches/docs/etc specific to the 6039Y model to post stuff in specific threads with a [6039Y] tag in the title somewhere ?
I believe this would make finding relevant information way easier for everyone
I still dream of unified methods/patches for both models, considering both devices shouldn't be that different, but that is up to the volunteers providing the software to decide.
What do you guys/gals think ?

DarkZell666 said:
Hello there
I recently acquired our beloved Idol 3, the 4.7" variant (aka 6039Y), and I couldn't help but noticing a rather disturbing fact :
=> Any information about the 6039Y model is diluted in general threads or buried inside the 6045Y threads ...
Would it be possible for everybody posting information/patches/docs/etc specific to the 6039Y model to post stuff in specific threads with a [6039Y] tag in the title somewhere ?
I believe this would make finding relevant information way easier for everyone
I still dream of unified methods/patches for both models, considering both devices shouldn't be that different, but that is up to the volunteers providing the software to decide.
What do you guys/gals think ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem you are gonna have is that you 6039 users are kinda gonna have to run with the ball because your root method AND version of TWRP is totally different then the ones for the 6045 so you can't even follow our guides (for example your version doesn't offer the option to backup "System image" which included partition info). Since no one has done it I don't think anyone would have an issue if you started "how to root on the 6039" and "how to install twrp on the 6039"...notice I'm not identifying a letter because I don't know if the 4.7 model only comes as a 6039Y....the 6045 has 6045i (usa/canada), 6045Y(europe), and 6045K (Various other places). There is also a rumored 6045B.

Dose the 4'7" even have same specs as 5'5" normally the specs ain't the same in smaller version CPU and ram etc , ie s4 quad core 2GB and s4 mini dual core 1.5gb and have totally different root guides and methods , I believe both variants will get good support evench its a cracking device and support is slowly building
Sent from my 6045Y using Tapatalk

DoobyDroid said:
Dose the 4'7" even have same specs as 5'5" normally the specs ain't the same in smaller version CPU and ram etc , ie s4 quad core 2GB and s4 mini dual core 1.5gb and have totally different root guides and methods , I believe both variants will get good support evench its a cracking device and support is slowly building
Sent from my 6045Y using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Different hardware. Different root method. Different version of TWRP. Different method of backing up system image. Basically the only thing that is the same is the fact they call both of them an "Idol 3".

Thought as much
Sent from my 6045Y using Tapatalk

famewolf said:
Different hardware. Different root method. Different version of TWRP. Different method of backing up system image. Basically the only thing that is the same is the fact they call both of them an "Idol 3".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Considering both phones are Qualcomm-based, I would assume they aren't THAT different after all ? (I AM new to Android development, so there must be something I'm missing for sure )
I mean, Android is based and Linux, and our chip is just yet another ARMv7 chip which the linux kernel supports pretty well, so what makes an ARMv7 chip different from any other ARMv7 chip ?
Do they optimize the kernel so far that they strip anything useless for each phone out of it, effectively rendering each kernel useless on any other phone ?
One last question : wouldn't building a generic ARMv7 kernel from this page be a good starting point ? (msm projet is for Qualcomm hardware) : https://source.android.com/source/building-kernels.html#figuring-out-which-kernel-to-build
Note that I might be daydreaming here and I don't fully realise what amount of works this implies.

DarkZell666 said:
Considering both phones are Qualcomm-based, I would assume they aren't THAT different after all ? (I AM new to Android development, so there must be something I'm missing for sure )
I mean, Android is based and Linux, and our chip is just yet another ARMv7 chip which the linux kernel supports pretty well, so what makes an ARMv7 chip different from any other ARMv7 chip ?
Do they optimize the kernel so far that they strip anything useless for each phone out of it, effectively rendering each kernel useless on any other phone ?
One last question : wouldn't building a generic ARMv7 kernel from this page be a good starting point ? (msm projet is for Qualcomm hardware) : https://source.android.com/source/building-kernels.html#figuring-out-which-kernel-to-build
Note that I might be daydreaming here and I don't fully realise what amount of works this implies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need to spend some time reading the existing threads such as the root thread etc where alot of this has been covered. http://forum.xda-developers.com/idol-3/help/root-ability-phone-t3116179

4.7" and 5.5" models have different hardware
The whole forum about Idol 3 is a big mess to me because most people do not realize that the Idol 3 comes in many different hardware configurations.
Indeed we should start stating comments in for at least 5.5 and 4.7 models. (GPU/3g/4g is different and what else) or for both if it applies.
Although this forum already implies it's about a 5.5 model according to the home page, there are many different hardware models discussed! We need active moderators when roms start roling to distinguish ourselfs from lemmings!

Maybe ask a mod to make a 4.7 model sub-forum.

Comes the unlocked bootloader on the SM-G950F ?????

Hello everyone, does anyone know if the SM-G950F purchased free will come with the free bootload or will you have to use it to free it?
Thank you.

lmmerono said:
Hello everyone, does anyone know if the SM-G950F purchased free will come with the free bootload or will you have to use it to free it?
Thank you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This has been discussed previously. Samsung added h/w level security to the Exynos 8895. Until it's in peoples hands no one knows for sure whether the changes will affect unlocking the bootloader.
gurinder073 said:
What version you think will have unlocked bootloader :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Based on this, possibly none. If the only reason anyone is buying Exynos vs. S-835 is the unlocked bootloader you might want to hold off being the first to get it.
Finally, the Exynos 8895 also includes what Samsung is calling an “enhanced security sub-system with a separate security processing unit” for use with user authentication, mobile payments, and the like. Based on Samsung’s description this sounds a heck of a lot like Apple’s Secure Enclave, which would be a very welcome development, as in Apple’s case it has made their phones a lot harder to break into.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11149/samsung-announces-exynos-8895-soc-10nm​

BarryH_GEG said:
Samsung added h/w level security to the Exynos 8895.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What EXACTLY does this mean??

The Phone Company said:
What EXACTLY does this mean??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its been compared to the Apple Secure Enclave (Security Coprocessor). Here's its description...
Security circuit designed to perform secure services for the rest of the SOC
Prevents main processor from gaining direct access to sensitive data
Used to support a number of different services - Most notably Touch ID
Runs its own operating system - Includes its own kernel, drivers, services, and applications
Sounds to me like anything security related is being moved to a separate and independent h/w coprocessor that's an integrated component of the SoC. The motive has to be a level of security that's as impenetrable as Apple's and significantly stronger than s/w based alternatives. Here's something Qualcomm got called out on recently...
A blog post published Thursday revealed that in stark contrast to the iPhone's iOS, Qualcomm-powered Android devices store the disk encryption keys in software. That leaves the keys vulnerable to a variety of attacks that can pull a key off a device. From there, the key can be loaded onto a server cluster, field-programmable gate array, or supercomputer that has been optimized for super-fast password cracking.
https://arstechnica.com/security/20...sk-encryption-just-got-much-weaker-heres-why/​
This is a Samsung first being introduced on the 8895. What it means and how its implemented remain to be seen but that level of security investment by Samsung can't be good for things likely hackable bootloaders.

So wait, the snapdragon that USA is getting maybe easier to get an unlocked bootloader for? Based on this convo I am reading here?

BarryH_GEG said:
This has been discussed previously. Samsung added h/w level security to the Exynos 8895. Until it's in peoples hands no one knows for sure whether the changes will affect unlocking the bootloader.
Based on this, possibly none. If the only reason anyone is buying Exynos vs. S-835 is the unlocked bootloader you might want to hold off being the first to get it.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11149/samsung-announces-exynos-8895-soc-10nm[/I]​
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
waiting for the answer to this!

So no one with an Exynos variant has tried to unlock the bootloader yet? Come on! Give us an answer! NOT Snapdragon, but Exynos. No Snapdragon owners need reply as you do NOT know. Only Exynos owners can answer this question.
Last year was simple OEM unlock for Galaxy S7 Exynos variants, I've been told repeatedly. That's what I'm talking about, whether it's still that easy or not.
I'm not talking about needing a dev to do magic.
GALAXY S7 EXYNOS
To OEM unlock is very easy on the exynos models . In our model is allow to do it with the click of a button , you have to:
Go to Settings / About device / Software info / Tap 7 times on Build number to enable Developer
Once developer options are enable ( you will see it under Settings) enter there you will see the option OEM Enable
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will SOMEONE please check to see if this can still be done on Exynos Galaxy S8 or not?

ChazzMatt said:
So no one with an Exynos variant has tried to unlock the bootloader yet? Come on! Give us an answer! NOT Snapdragon, but Exynos. No Snapdragon owners need reply as you do NOT know. Only Exynos owners can answer this question.
Last year was simple OEM unlock for Galaxy S7 Exynos variants, I've been told repeatedly. That's what I'm talking about, whether it's still that easy or not.
I'm not talking about needing a dev to do magic.
GALAXY S7 EXYNOS
Will SOMEONE please check to see if this can still be done on Exynos Galaxy S8 or not?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I followed the same steps and it works

aristopo said:
Yes, I followed the same steps and it works
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You actually unlocked your bootloader, or you confirmed last year's steps lead to the same choice?
Either way, THANK you for providing the screenshot.
So many people were worried Samsung had "Snadrogoned" the Exynos S8, so especially here in XDA seems like finding out the answer would be prioritized over wallpapers discussion and stuff.
If you actually unlocked the bootloader, please reply. Is someone else does, please reply!
Thanks!

I am not a specialist and I hate doing things I don't know about to my brand new phone
I followed the steps an toggled the button to ON
It asked for my pw, and here I stopped ...
Sorry ... for not doing it all the way

ChazzMatt said:
You actually unlocked your bootloader, or you confirmed last year's steps lead to the same choice?
Either way, THANK you for providing the screenshot.
So many people were worried Samsung had "Snadrogoned" the Exynos S8, so especially here in XDA seems like finding out the answer would be prioritized over wallpapers discussion and stuff.
If you actually unlocked the bootloader, please reply. Is someone else does, please reply!
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
aristopo said:
I am not a specialist and I hate doing things I don't know about to my brand new phone
I followed the steps an toggled the button to ON
It asked for my pw, and here I stopped ...
Sorry ... for not doing it all the way
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you anyway for the screenshot. Now, hopefully someone else can do it? Surely someone wants an unlocked bootloader so you can have custom ROMs, custom kernels?

Finally! Somebody who knows what XDA is about. Nobody wanted to even try to unlock the Exynos.
TWRP recovery in the S8+ forum get here.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=3594756
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=3594902

RAM, can it be upgraded?

Let's think on the event that you do have knowledge and tools and skills to perform such "surgery", also disregard the possible costs.
Is it possible to ?
I've seen in an app that my phone the xt1640 witch have only 2gb instead of 4 like the other variants, uses Samsung ram modules, meaning that they can be brought and used right?
Although I've heard that ram is actually part of the SoC,in this event, could one get the chip from another variant that have 4gb and use on another variant that have 2gb?.
I've read somewhere that SD600 series can handle up to either 6 or 8 gb of RAM, I not entirely sure, while 800 series up to 16gb
If the ram is embedded in the SoC so it means that there are sd617 with 6 or 8gb available, can one solder that on the phone?
If the ram is separated, can one buy larger modules and manually upgrade them?

LionLorena said:
Let's think on the event that you do have knowledge and tools and skills to perform such "surgery", also disregard the possible costs.
Is it possible to ?
I've seen in an app that my phone the xt1640 witch have only 2gb instead of 4 like the other variants, uses Samsung ram modules, meaning that they can be brought and used right?
Although I've heard that ram is actually part of the SoC,in this event, could one get the chip from another variant that have 4gb and use on another variant that have 2gb?.
I've read somewhere that SD600 series can handle up to either 6 or 8 gb of RAM, I not entirely sure, while 800 series up to 16gb
If the ram is embedded in the SoC so it means that there are sd617 with 6 or 8gb available, can one solder that on the phone?
If the ram is separated, can one buy larger modules and manually upgrade them?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You Have a Few Possibilities -
1. http://downloadmoreram.com
2.https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/www....re-modded-to-upgrade-ram-from-2gb-to-4gb/amp/

electronode said:
You Have a Few Possibilities -
1. http://downloadmoreram.com
2.https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/www....re-modded-to-upgrade-ram-from-2gb-to-4gb/amp/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The second one is interesting.
It means it is possible.
Now I wonder if it's possible to use another CPU model.
Like if the same series would work or even totally different series.
If it would require drivers and etc.

LionLorena said:
The second one is interesting.
It means it is possible.
Now I wonder if it's possible to use another CPU model.
Like if the same series would work or even totally different series.
If it would require drivers and etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Theorectically, I imagine only the same series of chips would work, given the motherboard traces and layout are likely specific to the SD 617. Micro-soldering on a different SoC to the Moto G4 motherboard, therefore, is gonna be very difficult/impossible. As you mentioned, that's before you even consider the firmware needed...