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.
Related
hey all,
I'm not a developer by any means but I just read a post up on engadget about someone exploiting the Pre and able to flash any unsigned firmware and what not. And this got me thinking about if it was possible to port over a different OS, like Android.
here's the engadget post: HERE.
and here's the original poster's link: HERE.
So my question to the devs out there... now with this exploit, would it even be possible to port Android OS over to the Palm Pre phone? Or am I just dreaming up things lol.
Because the specs on the Pre are pretty impressive.
Just a thought. Don't hate... participate
Pre uses an ARM Cortex A8 which is ARMv7 architecture. Dream is using ARMv6 architecture. I dunno if v7 is considered a strict superset of v6 but if it is you could probably just recompile the AOSP code. As for the pre side of things, that post seems promising, but I can't help but feel there are probably some hidden things Mr. Troughton-Smith hasn't discovered yet, particularly in regards to flashing down to the bootloader. At the core, Pre runs on the linux kernel so atleast that part is promising.
Frankly though, I'd have to again ask why at this point in time anyone would want to buy a Pre to put Android on it. It costs a ton without a contract and has no GSM/UMTS, making it all but useless outside the United States.
whats the reasoning behind limiting areas such as the USA Canada and Sweden to the Snapdragon 600 instead of giving them the Octa
2 reasons :
I. they cannot mass product the octa chip yet.
2. Until a few days ago, the octa did not support LTE chip for 4g. The above mentioned countries all support LTE.
If they cant provide enough chips for the device they want then they should pick a different chip and use that or just make less handsets. I hate it when manufacturers make several different versions of a device. It fragments development why not just make a single device and have a units d development force for a single device. Sadly I'll never understand manufacturers
Sent from uber hacked GS3
jack_slapped said:
If they cant provide enough chips for the device they want then they should pick a different chip and use that or just make less handsets. I hate it when manufacturers make several different versions of a device. It fragments development why not just make a single device and have a units d development force for a single device. Sadly I'll never understand manufacturers
Sent from uber hacked GS3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty sure the only "development" device manufacturers are interested in is the development they do themselves. Although they do know XDA (and similar) forums exist, they don't openly support or condone any of their devices being modified in any way by anyone but the OEM manufacturer. Also, 99.5% of most people that purchase a device don't know or care what chips are used in them as long as thy work. So I highly doubt the manufacturing methods used will ever change. Basically, if it works for the manufacturer, that is all they care about.
Hi guys!
First it's many months i don't come here on xda.
Second i haven't this device
...but i playing with this SoC from 2 months in a developers board (Odroid-XU-E).As you,i can go at 1.8 Ghz with A15 and 640 Mhz max with gpu when i build kernels for it..No luck until now in enabling 8 cores...also if for you is a bit useless,being the SoC in a phone on battery(where my board instead is AC powered!)but i know there were a lot of drama about it months ago about the CCI-400 bug
...and something is moving.look here those diff\patches
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/1/264
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/1/259
Thanks buddy. but i think samsung unofficially announced about not to support all 8 cores functional At one time.
Also what abiut heating and Boooom problem? I means, It may blast our mobile if not supported fully?
Edit: Seen that samsung official working on it.
A Suggestion: Change the thread name to True octa core.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Any pros to enlighten me what this actually means? Will this patch actually work?
Does it utilize the CCI400(which was believed to be broken) or other approach?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app
sert00 said:
Hi guys!
First it's many months i don't come here on xda.
Second i haven't this device
...but i playing with this SoC from 2 months in a developers board (Odroid-XU-E).As you,i can go at 1.8 Ghz with A15 and 640 Mhz max with gpu when i build kernels for it..No luck until now in enabling 8 cores...also if for you is a bit useless,being the SoC in a phone on battery(where my board instead is AC powered!)but i know there were a lot of drama about it months ago about the CCI-400 bug
...and something is moving.look here those diff\patches
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/1/264
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/1/259
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
a word from @AndreiLux to make things clear..
thanks !
Will this patch actually work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For us, basically no. These patches are for device-tree based kernels which our platform specific one isn't.
For the ODROID-XU / eventual theoretical DT based i9500 kernel it might be a possibility.
I see there's some non-standard alterations to the CCI driver related to the coherency ports, but they didn't even answer in the mailing list as to why they are there.
gdonanthony said:
a word from @AndreiLux to make things clear..
thanks !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i m also waiting for him. Posted the link in Previous thread of @AndreiLux buddy.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
AndreiLux said:
For us, basically no. These patches are for device-tree based kernels which is not part of ours.
For the ODROID-XU / eventual theoretical DT based i9500 kernel it might be a possibility.
I see there's some non-standard alterations to the CCI driver related to the coherency ports, but they didn't even answer in the mailing list as to why they are there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
@sert00 so here is the answer ... damn so sad about this things going on... and im hoping somethings will get better soon
thanks AndreiLux
AndreiLux said:
For us, basically no. These patches are for device-tree based kernels which our platform specific one isn't.
For the ODROID-XU / eventual theoretical DT based i9500 kernel it might be a possibility.
I see there's some non-standard alterations to the CCI driver related to the coherency ports, but they didn't even answer in the mailing list as to why they are there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does that mean it's a hardware level possibility, and just need to be implemented by clever brains?
They mentioned it was tested on 5410 dev board, dunno what that actually means..
Also regarding DT kernel, if I'm not wrong Linux is now forcing devs to switch to DT? So do you foresee any future for i9500 to actually have a DT kernel?
Forgive me if I was talking nonsense, I'm quite noob.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app
lch920619x said:
Does that mean it's a hardware level possibility, and just need to be implemented by clever brains?
They mentioned it was tested on 5410 dev board, dunno what that actually means..
Also regarding DT kernel, if I'm not wrong Linux is now forcing devs to switch to DT? So do you foresee any future for i9500 to actually have a DT kernel?
Forgive me if I was talking nonsense, I'm quite noob.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt Samsung will ever switch the current generation to a DT model much like they never update older phone's kernels, but backport the needed bits. They're talking about the SMDK board which are LSI internal development boards. It is a STUPID amount of effort to switch over to a DT kernel, any hope is that some third-party gets some kind of update on the matter and be able to pull from that. Even the XU has only some half-hearted DT support and they work mostly on the platform kernel which is similar to ours.
Alternatively I could just pull the relevant MCPM backend and that new EDCS from the patch and try to get hack something together. But I would want to at least those patches to be actually accepted into mainline and have the 5410 supported there before one begins on an adventure into unknown territory.
AndreiLux said:
I doubt Samsung will ever switch the current generation to a DT model much like they never update older phone's kernels, but backport the needed bits. They're talking about the SMDK board which are LSI internal development boards. It is a STUPID amount of effort to switch over to a DT kernel, any hope is that some third-party gets some kind of update on the matter and be able to pull from that. Even the XU has only some half-hearted DT support and they work mostly on the platform kernel which is similar to ours.
Alternatively I could just pull the relevant MCPM backend and that new EDCS from the patch and try to get hack something together. But I would want to at least those patches to be actually accepted into mainline and have the 5410 supported there before one begins on an adventure into unknown territory.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to admit i got some difficulties understanding part of your post.
However I think I grasp the main idea and I'm looking forward to seeing how things will work once you try to implement the patch. Thanks for your effort.
BTW I'm using Chinese C version ROM(ZCUCMH1 to be specific), if I flash perseus ontop of my ROM, camera will refuse to open and report camera failure.
Not asking you to solve it but just curious if you can tell me what will possibily cause this?
Also if you have time can you point out what exactly is stopping us from having a fully functional AOSP build?
We got full kernel source code due to GPL, don't we?
And in another post you said it's nothing to do with documentation.
So what is it?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app
thanks for the answer andreilux!i posted it only as a info.also on odroid board will be ready only when mainlined on 3.13 kernel,as sad by a linux developer,and there's tons of works to do to others stuffs to works!
I'm going to apologize in advance and hope there is someone who is patient enough to try and deal with me because I'm a complete idiot when it comes to anything electronic. So, I'm sorry. But any help is appreciated.
I recently downloaded SnoopStitch but when I opened it, I get a error message : Fatal Condition device not Compatiable. Device does not exist / no Qualcomm chip / no ROM
So, I know it exists. I thought it was on the device list when I went back and looked but I don't know for sure because it seems as if there is actually 700 different S4's and I have no idea which mine is, I guess. I think.
And I think ROM has something to do with memory but I don't really know and I have no idea how that would help.
So far as I know it is just a normal Samsung Galaxy S4 bought last September through Bell Mobility in Canada.
Is there anyway I can make it compatiable? Can I get this Qualcomm thing?
Thanks,
Judas
ROM is android itself, the operating system on the phone, the whole software part. The ROM is what makes this device an android phone.
Qualcomm is the hardware manufacturer. More specifically, the processor and graphics processing unit.
The S4 came in two variants, a Qualcomm variant and an Exynos (Samsung's own processor) variant. You have the Qualcomm variant.
The Bell Canada version of the S4 is an SGH-1337M.
If your device does not appear on the compatibility list, there are certain ways to make the app think it's a different device. But let's get into that once we are certain it isn't.
GDReaper said:
ROM is android itself, the operating system on the phone, the whole software part. The ROM is what makes this device an android phone.
Qualcomm is the hardware manufacturer. More specifically, the processor and graphics processing unit.
The S4 came in two variants, a Qualcomm variant and an Exynos (Samsung's own processor) variant. You have the Qualcomm variant.
The Bell Canada version of the S4 is an SGH-1337M.
If your device does not appear on the compatibility list, there are certain ways to make the app think it's a different device. But let's get into that once we are certain it isn't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But we know, don't we? Or is it the ROM?
I was going to add a screen capture I took of the error message but I can't figure out how to upload a picture.
JudasK said:
But we know, don't we? Or is it the ROM?
I was going to add a screen capture I took of the error message but I can't figure out how to upload a picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SnoopSnitch requires root and stock rom (Stock rom meaning the factory pre-installed software).
Since you claim to be disinclined towards technology, I assume you have the latter, but not the former. Am I correct?
GDReaper said:
ROM is android itself, the operating system on the phone, the whole software part. The ROM is what makes this device an android phone.
Qualcomm is the hardware manufacturer. More specifically, the processor and graphics processing unit.
The S4 came in two variants, a Qualcomm variant and an Exynos (Samsung's own processor) variant. You have the Qualcomm variant.
The Bell Canada version of the S4 is an SGH-1337M.
If your device does not appear on the compatibility list, there are certain ways to make the app think it's a different device. But let's get into that once we are certain it isn't.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GDReaper said:
SnoopSnitch requires root and stock rom (Stock rom meaning the factory pre-installed software).
Since you claim to be disinclined towards technology, I assume you have the latter, but not the former. Am I correct?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most definitely correct.
JudasK said:
Most definitely correct.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, then you will have too root your phone.
You can find guides in the help thread.
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...