Database Develop

[DEVS ONLY][BCM21553] Samsung Galaxy Pocket GT-S5300 (Cori) Development Discussion

General informations:
This thread's aim is only to represent a central meeting and discussion point for BCM21553 developers and, in particular, for the open Kernel/ROM sources development for the Samsung Galaxy Pocket GT-S5300 (codenamed Cori).
Information for common users:
As already described in the previous section, if you are not a developer, please restrict your posts to the general discussion thread so that developers can maintain good communication. Every post that is not strictly respecting these rules will be reported to the forum moderators. Thanks for your understanding.
For any other BCM21553 device related question or information, please, use this thread as a reference point, instead:
[DEVS ONLY][BCM21553 series] CyanogenMod 11 for BCM21553 Development Discussion

As someone already might know, I'm streambinder, from MoltenMotherBoard team.
I have already followed some projects for the GT-S5300, but especially kept in contact
with some of the events related to the porting of ROM and Kernel sources for BCM21553 chipset based devices.
In this precise moment, the sources in my possession allow you to be able to compile
a bugfree CWM 5.0.2.8 (based on CyanogenMod 7 code) with a kernel based on the Samsung stock one.
The only - fundamental - problem was due to the fact that unless I hadn't used the prebuilt INIT binary
token in the Samsung stock firmware boot.img, the phone would not work - or, better, boot up.
This means that until the situation - regarding this issue - doesn't change, our access to the porting of custom ROM
would be barred.
Recently, I decided to give Cori another chance and rework my sources, looking at the wonderful work brought
by the BroadcomCM team on CyanogenMod 9 (in particular, thanks to @bieltv.3 and @Alberto96) and @psyke83 on CyanogenMod 11.
They've not only been able to run these two ROMs in a more or less crude way, but this developer has been able to write
the necessary strings to make the INIT binary of some of these BCM21553 devices opensource.
Strong of this informations, I readjusted some of the sources of BroadcomCM's CyangenMod 9, which includes
all the progress carried out by both the team and psyke83, in order to make them work even on Cori,
and am now next to the first test of the CWM 6.X.X.X, based on IceCreamSandwich code.
At the same time, @akhbh is working on the KitKat code based CWM.
I hope I can give more information about any progress as soon as possible.

The General Discussion thread for non-development issues is here:
*.[DISCUSSION] CyanogenMod 11 For Galaxy Pocket GT-S5300 Discussion Thread

Made a first test of CWM based on CyanogenMod 9 code.
It seems it cannot flash it as it weighs so much compared to its partition configuration value: in fact, the maximum boot partition size is set up to 5.0MB, but the compiled boot.img weighs 5.3MB.
Will have to resize its weight in order to make it fill into the partition.
@akhbh, have you had any complication in these terms, with CyanogenMod 11 sources?
@psyke83, what do you suggest to do? Do you think an increasement of boot partition would be a better idea?

streambinder said:
Made a first test of CWM based on CyanogenMod 9 code.
It seems it cannot flash it as it weighs so much compared to its partition configuration value: in fact, the maximum boot partition size is set up to 5.0MB, but the compiled boot.img weighs 5.3MB.
Will have to resize its weight in order to make it fill into the partition.
@akhbh, have you had any complication in these terms, with CyanogenMod 11 sources?
@psyke83, what do you suggest to do? Do you think an increasement of boot partition would be a better idea?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, I didn't faced those complications. My boot.img weighted around 4.5 MB in lzma compression mode. In gzip, it increased to more than 5 mb.

akhbh said:
No, I didn't faced those complications. My boot.img weighted around 4.5 MB in lzma compression mode. In gzip, it increased to more than 5 mb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perfect.
Which kernel have you based your build on?

streambinder said:
Perfect.
Which kernel have you based your build on?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, I took the GeTux kernel for cori, had to change the board name though and then compile it. CWM was booting even before changing the board name but there was no reaction from the phone on trying to boot cm9/cm11
And after changing board name, a black screen on trying to boot
Another info: When tried to merge cori source into the bcm21553 common one, it did compile but gave bootloop of GT-S5300 logo on trying to boot as well as when trying to go in CWM.
Bieltv.3 recommended to use cori source instead of the bcm21553 common one so we used cori sources

akhbh said:
Well, I took the GeTux kernel for cori, had to change the board name though and then compile it. CWM was booting even before changing the board name but there was no reaction from the phone on trying to boot cm9/cm11
And after changing board name, a black screen on trying to boot
Another info: When tried to merge cori source into the bcm21553 common one, it did compile but gave bootloop of GT-S5300 logo on trying to boot as well as when trying to go in CWM.
Bieltv.3 recommended to use cori source instead of the bcm21553 common one so we used cori sources
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suggest to use our Kernel sources for now, too: it will automatically bypass few errors/issues/bootloops that we cannot now fight with.
The most important thing is to make INIT working from sources (hope it will be working
on my CM9 sources, too) and check that every our configuration is correctly working and
making Cori boot into recovery.
Once we'll make it perfectly working without any kind of issue, will be the right time to try
to make Cori supported with the BC21553-common kernel.

streambinder said:
I suggest to use our Kernel sources for now, too: it will automatically bypass few errors/issues/bootloops that we cannot now fight with.
The most important thing is to make INIT working from sources (hope it will be working
on my CM9 sources, too) and check that every our configuration is correctly working and
making Cori boot into recovery.
Once we'll make it perfectly working without any kind of issue, will be the right time to try
to make Cori supported with the BC21553-common kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, I will use your kernel sources and try if something is changed once I reach home. For now, I neither have this device nor a PC, as I'm in another city.
Will be keenly watching your work. Will start after reaching home around the end of September

akhbh said:
Okay, I will use your kernel sources and try if something is changed once I reach home. For now, I neither have this device nor a PC, as I'm in another city.
Will be keenly watching your work. Will start after reaching home around the end of September
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No problem, mate.
Here you have every source in my possession:
platform_kernel_samsung_cori
platform_device_samsung_cori
Keep in contact with me, as I will need some informations by you.
Anyway I'm now making another build, keeping some not so much important binaries excluded, so that I can make the compiled boot.img fill into our little Cori's boot partition. I know it's a dirty workaround, but if it works, I'll use it untill @psyke83 will suggest me a better way to do.

streambinder said:
No problem, mate.
Here you have every source in my possession:
platform_kernel_samsung_cori | github.com
platform_device_samsung_cori
Keep in contact with me, as I will need some informations by you.
Anyway I'm now making another build, keeping some not so much important binaries excluded, so that I can make the compiled boot.img fill into our little Cori's boot partition. I know it's a dirty workaround, but if it works, I'll use it untill @psyke83 will suggest me a better way to do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
have u tried to build cwm v6 from cm9 source ??

cleverior.ipul said:
have u tried to build cwm v6 from cm9 source ??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course, mate. I'm working on it, right now.
It doesn't seem to boot, strange if the same INIT binary sources are working for @akhbh.
#UPDATE
In order to troubleshoot, I'll give you some info.
For his build I used these sources:
platform_kernel_samsung_cori
platform_device_samsung_cori
android_device_samsung_bcm21553-common
Applied some lines on our bcm21553-bootimg.mk, too, in order to exclude parted and mke2fs and make the compiled boot.img weigh less.
@cleverior.ipul, can you link me your kernel sources, as akhbh said he used your ones for CM11.
@akhbh, which modifies have you applied in order to compile CWM based on CM11 code? Which device tree?
#UPDATE 2
Attached my compiled boot.img.
If anyone of you would extract it (you can easily use this tool: bootimgtools - read how to use it in the README) and make a diff with the CM11 one (just extract the ramdisk of both boot.imgs and - in the terminal - use this command: diff -urN /path/to/cm9/ramdisk /path/to/cm11/ramdisk > diff.patch), would make to me a huge favour.
Let me know.

streambinder said:
Of course, mate. I'm working on it, right now.
It doesn't seem to boot, strange if the same INIT binary sources are working for @akhbh.
#UPDATE
In order to troubleshoot, I'll give you some info.
For his build I used these sources:
platform_kernel_samsung_cori
platform_device_samsung_cori
android_device_samsung_bcm21553-common
Applied some lines on our bcm21553-bootimg.mk, too, in order to exclude parted and mke2fs and make the compiled boot.img weigh less.
@cleverior.ipul, can you link me your kernel sources, as akhbh said he used your ones for CM11.
@akhbh, which modifies have you applied in order to compile CWM based on CM11 code? Which device tree?
#UPDATE 2
Attached my compiled boot.img.
If anyone of you would extract it (you can easily use this tool: bootimgtools - read how to use it in the README) and make a diff with the CM11 one (just extract the ramdisk of both boot.imgs and - in the terminal - use this command: diff -urN /path/to/cm9/ramdisk /path/to/cm11/ramdisk > diff.patch), would make to me a huge favour.
Let me know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we didn't had significant changes. Perhaps the same as totoro. But, that resulted in the internal_sd not mounting error in cwm.
Sadly, as said before, I am away from my home city and can't provide the files to you and can't do the boot.img diffs as well
Try to ask psyke83, he might have a solution for that

akhbh said:
I think we didn't had significant changes. Perhaps the same as totoro. But, that resulted in the internal_sd not mounting error in cwm.
Sadly, as said before, I am away from my home city and can't provide the files to you and can't do the boot.img diffs as well
Try to ask psyke83, he might have a solution for that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then, if you didn't make any massive change upon the sources, then I'll only try using your kernel.
Can you give me your kernel sources, mate, please?

streambinder said:
Then, if you didn't make any massive change upon the sources, then I'll only try using your kernel.
Can you give me your kernel sources, mate, please?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Currently, I can provide you the boot.img only. For the sources, @cleverior.ipul can provide the kernel sources coz as said earlier, his kernel is used. Well, we were working together to bring cm11 but weren't successful

akhbh said:
Currently, I can provide you the boot.img only. For the sources, @cleverior.ipul can provide the kernel sources.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, please send it to me, will compare it with my package.

streambinder said:
Ok, please send it to me, will compare it with my package.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here it is:
http://www.4shared.com/zip/1nKFbOJ2ba/ccccGetux_CM11.html

streambinder said:
Of course, mate. I'm working on it, right now.
It doesn't seem to boot, strange if the same INIT binary sources are working for @akhbh.
#UPDATE
In order to troubleshoot, I'll give you some info.
For his build I used these sources:
platform_kernel_samsung_cori
platform_device_samsung_cori
android_device_samsung_bcm21553-common
Applied some lines on our bcm21553-bootimg.mk, too, in order to exclude parted and mke2fs and make the compiled boot.img weigh less.
@cleverior.ipul, can you link me your kernel sources, as akhbh said he used your ones for CM11.
@akhbh, which modifies have you applied in order to compile CWM based on CM11 code? Which device tree?
#UPDATE 2
Attached my compiled boot.img.
If anyone of you would extract it (you can easily use this tool: bootimgtools - read how to use it in the README) and make a diff with the CM11 one (just extract the ramdisk of both boot.imgs and - in the terminal - use this command: diff -urN /path/to/cm9/ramdisk /path/to/cm11/ramdisk > diff.patch), would make to me a huge favour.
Let me know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
here the link source https://github.com/cleverior/android_kernel_samsung_cori
i've changed the board name. If your device can not boot after using the zImage from this source, then rename init.bcm21553.rc to init.gt-s5300.rc.

@streambinder, what is grom? As bieltv.3 said that init built grom for cori is required to fix adb over cwm recovery. If adb gets working, then possibly the black screen while booting cm11 might get fixed

akhbh said:
@streambinder, what is grom? As bieltv.3 said that init built grom for cori is required to fix adb over cwm recovery. If adb gets working, then possibly the black screen while booting cm11 might get fixed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sincerely don't what are you talking about.
Anyway, have to try to understand where's the problem with the not-booting CWM.
Will try with your sources and let you know.

[DEV][G925F] CyanogenMod 12.1 Development

Hello there, it's time to get this rolling somewhere.
This is a Development-Thread. Please don't post if you aren't a developer.
What this IS
This is a Development thread, a platform for developers to discuss the development of CyanogenMod for the G925F. It's made so that we can get this working, fix up the problems - because there will be severe ones - and achieve a working official Rom at some point.
At the moment it's @OldDroid and me with help, but it would be awesome if interested devs would join in so that we can make this a team effort.
In short, it's a Dev-Thread in a dev section.
Right now it doesn't work and I'm not sure that it will work.
What this IS NOT
This is NOT a working Rom. Not even close. I can only link you to the kernel repo and soon to device and vendor, as they are almost completed for a first try.
And yes, there is no download link for the Rom. Because there isn't anything you could download yet.
This is also NOT intended as a Q&A thread. Please don't ask if your variant will be supported, I will respond by trolling. Firstand only priority is to get this running, then we'll talk about variants.
And ETA is an evil word with no meaning here. I work slowly, deal with it
Where are we currently?
Much further than a day ago
Thanks to @OldDroid, we've teamed up
All the links you want (minus the download link :angel
device: (soon, almost complete)
https://gitlab.com/mythos234/device_samsung_zeroltexx
vendor:
https://gitlab.com/mythos234/vendor_samsung_zerolte
kernel:
https://gitlab.com/mythos234/zerolte-kernel-CM
Once available, buggy alpha builds will be posted here
///
vendor and device will soon be pushed to my github
​

Reserved

i'll join you ... also started working on cm12.1 for s6 edge 5 days ago (currently in england with my school class)

vendor is setup
OldDroid said:
i'll join you ... also started working on cm12.1 for s6 edge 5 days ago (currently in england with my school class)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Welcome aboard then
vendor is finally setup and good to go!
https://github.com/mythos234/vendor_samsung_zerolte
It's apparently not without some minor casualties, but we got it. Huge thanks to @RaymanFX, he's helping me, since I'm not that much into CM building yet and I'm also basing this project on his CM for the N910C, which's 5433 is darn similar to our 7420, so we got a pretty good base to begin with.

add me as participant to the repos ^^
https://github.com/OldDroid

OldDroid said:
add me as participant to the repos ^^
https://github.com/OldDroid
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Done for all the 3 of them

Looks like I killed Bluetooth for now (lol). Other than that it's slow but steady progress.

mythos234 said:
Looks like I killed Bluetooth for now (lol). Other than that it's slow but steady progress.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you mean "killed"? Killed the chip or wiped the MAC addr. or something?

nasko_spasko said:
What do you mean "killed"? Killed the chip or wiped the MAC addr. or something?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm currently building the Rom with completely removed Bluetooth support

First Build is compiled and ready for a test.. But I can't install the zip. This would be hillarious if it wasn't so annoying

mythos234 said:
Besides I said it can't be installed Hard to test something you can't even install
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that there was a mistake in the partition sizes.. /system was declared as 4.1GB, but it's only 3.6GB. Recompiling with a new value, should be able to flash it then

Good luck develop without documentation for exynos chipset.
But can you tell us more in details how porting works and what are the challenges with it.
Is it hard to develop a rom without samsung binary files and drivers? I know they are proprietary and closed soruce.
If just Samsung could be more developer friendly like Sony.
We can request source for closed binaries here, http://opensource.samsung.com/reception/receptionSub.do?method=inquiryView, most likely they wont answer

Aircondition said:
Good luck develop without documentation for exynos chipset.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The lack of drivers makes this a fun exercise almost Where's be the challenge if everything was easy...?

Aircondition said:
Good luck develop without documentation for exynos chipset.
But can you tell us more in details how porting works and what are the challenges with it.
Is it hard to develop a rom without samsung binary files and drivers? I know they are proprietary and closed soruce.
If just Samsung could be more developer friendly like Sony.
We can request source for closed binaries here, http://opensource.samsung.com/reception/receptionSub.do?method=inquiryView, most likely they wont answer
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't say what the challenges here will be, since I couldn't manage to even flash it yet - Second build is compiling since hours now. For now it's using all the proprietrary stuff we managed to grab and some additional stuff from the 5433 CM. But without booting it's hard to tell what won't work and might present a challenge ^^ From what I saw it'll be tough to just get the modem running. The hard part is to write the drivers yourself

mythos234 said:
I can't say what the challenges here will be, since I couldn't manage to even flash it yet - Second build is compiling since hours now. For now it's using all the proprietrary stuff we managed to grab and some additional stuff from the 5433 CM. But without booting it's hard to tell what won't work and might present a challenge ^^ From what I saw it'll be tough to just get the modem running. The hard part is to write the drivers yourself
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's interesting that you can use drivers from 5433, which is a 32bit platform. Most drivers are not compatible when you switch from 32bit to 64bit if I am right?
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

lch920619x said:
It's interesting that you can use drivers from 5433, which is a 32bit platform. Most drivers are not compatible when you switch from 32bit to 64bit if I am right?
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As a base to know how to do it, obviously we can't just use drivers for a different chipset

Updated the /system size in the BoardConfig and at least it flashes. But it doesn't want to boot for some reason yet.

mythos234 said:
Updated the /system size in the BoardConfig and at least it flashes. But it doesn't want to boot for some reason yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have the 5.1.1 boot loader and are using 5.0.2 as a base. Sboot will not boot it. As a fyi. It checks Linux versions.

-Mr. X- said:
If you have the 5.1.1 boot loader and are using 5.0.2 as a base. Sboot will not boot it. As a fyi. It checks Linux versions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both is 5.1.1 and Sboot seems to clear the boot as well, everything seems to go fine, it just doesn't boot. :/ Trying with building the kernel during the build itself instead of using a prebuilt one and see how that goes

mythos234 said:
Both is 5.1.1 and Sboot seems to clear the boot as well, everything seems to go fine, it just doesn't boot. :/ Trying with building the kernel during the build itself instead of using a prebuilt one and see how that goes
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would personally flash an Engineering boot loader while doing this, to ensure version checking is not the issue.

[KERNEL] BTV-DL09 | Lazy Kernel Development

This is a real possibility.
Have managed to compile and sort out some auto build scripts (work to do).
Need to get hold of some TWRP flash-able binaries. Current device state is bootloader locked and unrooted. Waiting for return period to expire........... Hoping current rooted users here can answer a few questions and provide any info so I can progress until I have rooted and personally flashed the kernel.
There are no promises or guarantees here.
https://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=73794953&postcount=6
EDIT: waited a week, now applied for bootloader unlock code, unfortunately I have to wait 14 days after creating Huawei ID............ stupid !! I don't wish to unlock via any other method.
Might lose interest in that time .......... and work probably get in the way.
Don't really wish to move on blindly if it does not flash, nor stable as stock build. I need to flash on my own device first. In the mean time, I'll get my auto build scripts in order and do a little research. Was hoping to unlock and pull running STOCK official 307 boot.img from device. Downloaded the official firmware package from Huawei, but couldn't find any boot.img ......

We will be very thankful if you could develop a kernel for us. Hopefully you won't lose your interest on it!

carlchan31 said:
We will be very thankful if you could develop a kernel for us. Hopefully you won't lose your interest on it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I require is :
boot.img partition size. Check /proc/partitions ............. I'm not sure which it is on DL09 device. I don't want to build a boot.img larger than the actual partition. So need a Huawei user to point his out.
boot directory. check something like /dev/block/platform/_________/by-name/boot ?
Require a stock unmodified boot.img for 307 firmware
As I said, I'm unrooted for the next 14, now 13 days.......... Obtaining the above will assist to finish my build environment, and auto build scripts etc. Then can start on a few commits to fix some build warnings.
Help me to help you
Edit: installed the 'disc info' app, and still no joy to locate the boot.img directory and partition size. Will have to wait another couple weeks unless someone helps out.

Hi!
I just downloaded and compiled the nougat kernel source, but the repacked kernel failed to boot. I'm not sure wheather I should make some modifications prior compiling. I have the wifi version with C100B302. Will investigate when I have more time. @Lazing_About are your sources available on github? I'll push mine once I can sort out the issues.
Edit:
The initial huawei sources are already up in case anyone wants to clone or contribute.
https://github.com/TaRsY/android_kernel_huawei_BTV-W09

TaRsY said:
Hi!
I just downloaded and compiled the nougat kernel source, but the repacked kernel failed to boot. I'm not sure wheather I should make some modifications prior compiling. I have the wifi version with C100B302. Will investigate when I have more time. @Lazing_About are your sources available on github? I'll push mine once I can sort out the issues.
Edit:
The initial huawei sources are already up in case anyone wants to clone or contribute.
https://github.com/TaRsY/android_kernel_huawei_BTV-W09
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately no one provided what I hoped for so I could continue. I presume lack of interest, so whilst waiting for my 14 days, I have decided to buy a Note 8 (considered OnePlus5) and have spent time developing a private kernel for that. Work commitments have now got in the way with that too. At least I managed to patch to the latest Linux mainstream and quite a few patches too. Haven't yet rooted that either (of flashed). So I'll be out of action for all October afraid. My sources are still private until actual collaboration or public release. No need for anyone pulling / cherry-picking **** that is unstable if I haven't tested (at least method) first. Hopefully I'll have some time next month to take a further look at both projects, and eventually filter that work here

movie downloader for huawei mediapad M3

Thread closed at OP request

[DEV] Using Project Treble to boot generic AOSP Image

According to Project Treble lead Iliyan Malchev,
Malchev says that Treble standardizes Android hardware support to such a degree that generic Android builds compiled from AOSP can boot and run on every Treble device. In fact, these “raw AOSP” builds are what will be used for some of the CTS testing Google requires all Android OEMs to pass in order to license the Google apps—it’s not just that things should work, they are required to work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Now that there's an Oreo beta for the Essential Phone that supports Treble, perhaps this can be used to further development on the device.
/u/foremi on Reddit confirmed that simply flashing a Pixel 2 system and boot image to the device is not enough, as it fails to boot, so the question is what constitutes a generic AOSP build?
I don't have Linux installed right now or I'd build it myself, but I suspect that building it with the simple target device of "generic" might be what Malchev is referring to.
If any devs would like to test this theory or give their input as to how they think this actually works I think it'd be incredibly useful for not just Essential phone development, but Android development as a whole.
EDIT: @phhusson confirms that the target device should be aosp_arm64_ab

FWIW "generic AOSP build" is really what it says it is.
I have access to the "Google certification generic AOSP build" (that's weirdly not public, I don't know why), so I gave it a try. (Edit: So if the ROM was Treble-certified, it would work)
I get the Android bootanimation, but that's all (I have to say that's still a big step forward compared to other Android versions
Looking at the logs, I see a loop of crash because of: /vendor/bin/hw/[email protected]
Which I guess is the HAL for the accessories, but that doesn't seem to be the reason for the crash
The reason of the crash, seem to be this:
11-15 12:59:04.491 5331 5331 F MediaProfiles: frameworks/av/media/libmedia/MediaProfiles.cpp:329 CHECK(quality != -1) failed.
in CAF, frameworks/av/media/libmedia/MediaProfiles.cpp we see vendor-specific (i.e. not in AOSP) quality attributes, like "vga"
And it is defined by Essential's framework (in vendor/etc/media_profiles_V1_0.xml)
Considering there are media_profiles xml files, I'd guess that _V1_0 is supposed to only contain AOSP-capable qualities
Edit2: The fingerprint of "certification generic AOSP", is Android/aosp_arm64_ab/generic_arm64_ab:8.0.0/OTR1.171023.001/4412360:userdebug/test-keys
So my guess to build this is that lunch aosp_arm64_ab && make should work
Edit3: the generated fingerprint is too long to build, needs to do make BUILD_NUMBER=4412360
Edit4: To make the situation more clear:
- NO, current ROM is NOT Treble capable
- BUT, almost everything is available for that. Every HAL is using "hwbinder" which is the basis, and most work needed for Treble
Also, I've seen some reddit comment mentioning boot.img.
Current version of Treble only concerns system.img, and NOT boot.img!
Future version are supposed to have generic boot.img as well, but that's not to be expected before at the very least Android P.

phhusson said:
Edit2: The fingerprint of "certification generic AOSP", is Android/aosp_arm64_ab/generic_arm64_ab:8.0.0/OTR1.171023.001/4412360:userdebug/test-keys
So my guess to build this is that lunch aosp_arm64_ab && make should work
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was gonna link to the aosp_arm64 make file but it said it was specifically for the emulator so I wasn't sure, that's good to know though.
phhusson said:
Also, I've seen some reddit comment mentioning boot.img.
Current version of Treble only concerns system.img, and NOT boot.img!
Future version are supposed to have generic boot.img as well, but that's not to be expected before at the very least Android P.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for this, I suspected such but couldn't find a clear answer from Google on the matter so I suggested trying the boot.img as well just in case.
Now, someone has to test this on a different Treble device such as the Pixel or Pixel 2. I'm thinking MAYBE because the Oreo build for essential is just a beta its treble implementation isn't finished and hasn't passed Google's CTS requirements to boot the generic aosp image. Perhaps this will change in the final build.
For what it's worth I only have a LG V20 right now which currently doesn't support Treble, so I'm pretty useless as far as testing anything goes, but if this is figured out it'll greatly influence what device I go with when I eventually upgrade.

Now, someone has to test this on a different Treble device such as the Pixel or Pixel 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup. I feel like Treble deserves its own "device" section in XDA
I'm afraid I'm working on something that other people already did on other devices...
I'm thinking MAYBE because the Oreo build for essential is just a beta its treble implementation isn't finished and hasn't passed Google's CTS requirements to boot the generic aosp image. Perhaps this will change in the final build.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's my guess as well.

Interesting stuff. Excited to hear updates on this. PM me if you make a breakthrough and want a feature

MishaalRahman said:
Interesting stuff. Excited to hear updates on this. PM me if you make a breakthrough and want a feature
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's not much I can do on my end sadly, without a Treble capable device, but if anyone is interested in trying this on another device with a mainline Treble-enabled Oreo build I'd install Linux and post the build up so just let me know

PhantomGamers said:
There's not much I can do on my end sadly, without a Treble capable device, but if anyone is interested in trying this on another device with a mainline Treble-enabled Oreo build I'd install Linux and post the build up so just let me know
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google Pixel/Pixel 2 will do, yes?

MishaalRahman said:
Google Pixel/Pixel 2 will do, yes?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah they should be fine

PhantomGamers said:
Yeah they should be fine
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Alright, I'll find you some testers

MishaalRahman said:
Alright, I'll find you some testers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's the system image if you find anyone, it's a straight fresh build of aosp branch 8.0.0r34
If it doesn't work it's possible that I messed the build up, but it should be fine.

Can someone running the Oreo beta post their results running this app?
If the beta isn't CTS compliant, we should know.

PhantomGamers said:
Can someone running the Oreo beta post their results running this app?
If the beta isn't CTS compliant, we should know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hero you go

TheDethEgineer said:
Hero you go
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks a lot!
This is interesting... according to Malchev, CTS testing REQUIRES a device to boot a generic AOSP image, and yet the Oreo build is CTS certified and doesn't boot the AOSP image...

PhantomGamers said:
Thanks a lot!
This is interesting... according to Malchev, CTS testing REQUIRES a device to boot a generic AOSP image, and yet the Oreo build is CTS certified and doesn't boot the AOSP image...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's true only for new devices, not for devices upgrading for nougat to oreo.
I wasn't aware there was an AMA yesterday... Too bad we could have asked.

Tester with OG Pixel XL says it gives invalid zip file format error when trying to flash in TWRP

MishaalRahman said:
Tester with OG Pixel XL says it gives invalid zip file format error when trying to flash in TWRP
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How about flashing the system image directly from a Pixel 2 XL?

MishaalRahman said:
Tester with OG Pixel XL says it gives invalid zip file format error when trying to flash in TWRP
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not a TWRP flashable zip, you have to extract the system.img from the zip and flash it with fastboot in the bootloader.
Also as @PresidentMcCain said, seeing the results of flashing a pixel 2 xl system image would be interesting too.
Oh and make sure the tester's OG pixel is already running Oreo before trying. Just adding that in case they didn't upgrade yet.

PhantomGamers said:
It's not a TWRP flashable zip, you have to extract the system.img from the zip and flash it with fastboot in the bootloader.
Also as @PresidentMcCain said, seeing the results of flashing a pixel 2 xl system image would be interesting too.
Oh and make sure the tester's OG pixel is already running Oreo before trying. Just adding that in case they didn't upgrade yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, I see.
Do you happen to know the exact command? I'm not that familiar with A/B partition devices and how that changes fastboot commands.

MishaalRahman said:
Ah, I see.
Do you happen to know the exact command? I'm not that familiar with A/B partition devices and how that changes fastboot commands.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe it should work as normal
fastboot flash system system.img
EDIT: Apparently with the A/B partitions you'd do fastboot flash system_b system_other.img to flash the b partition, but the aosp build didn't include a system_other.img so I'm assuming perhaps it's not necessary

So far I still can't find anyone willing to flash this on their Pixel haha. People are really hesitant to flash stuff on the Pixel it seems. Times are not like they used to be =\

General Kernel source finally released

It finally happened the source code is released
https://github.com/MiCode/Xiaomi_Kernel_OpenSource/tree/spes-r-oss
Leaving this also as a place for first discussions. So, go for it.

NeoPreacher said:
It finally happened the source code is released
https://github.com/MiCode/Xiaomi_Kernel_OpenSource/tree/spes-r-oss
Leaving this also as a place for first discussions. So, go for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Finally!!!

Let's gooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

It only took them a year and three months to release it.
Oh god...

NeoSDAP said:
It only took them a year and three months to release it.
Oh god...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lmao

Snapdragon_Mid_2020.SPF.1.0.1R_r00024.0
lol it makes even more sad.

Does the Kernel being for Android 11 mean its useless for us? Can Android 12/13 roms not be made with it? I really just wanted working doubletap2wake, would the Android 11 Kernel make that happen? Thank you!

Zylam Marex said:
Does the Kernel being for Android 11 mean its useless for us? Can Android 12/13 roms not be made with it? I really just wanted working doubletap2wake, would the Android 11 Kernel make that happen? Thank you!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No; sure; works already flawless in PA, but sure why not. There are others problems eg. missing drivers in source and missing devs in group. Fyi: many people using a13 custom rom with a11 stock kernel actually on rn11

nice. they can now close 1k issues regarding spes kernel. hahaha

pulsar said:
nice. they can now close 1k issues regarding spes kernel. hahaha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are some people fixing the issues with source already!

NeoPreacher said:
No; sure; works already flawless in PA, but sure why not. There are others problems eg. missing drivers in source and missing devs in group. Fyi: many people using a13 custom rom with a11 stock kernel actually on rn11
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh wow really, tape2wake works great in PA? I have tried almost all roms but PA. Thank you for letting me know, a shame the Kernel is missing drivers and such. I wonder why Xiaomi is trying to make sure the Note 11 is never developed for, it's such a good phone with a custom rom.

BerserkSlayer said:
There are some people fixing the issues with source already!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha I think Pulsar was referring to Xiaomi's github page where there would be like 10 posts a day asking for Spes kernel

tap2wake also works on PixelExperience, FWIW.
EDIT: board_id.h is present in the same directory, not in include/. \
I've tried compiling the kernel from Xiaomi's sources and stumbled across an error about a missing header file:
Code:
drivers/misc/st21nfc.c:43:22: fatal error: board_id.h: No such file or directory
#include <board_id.h>
^
compilation terminated.
make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:338: drivers/misc/st21nfc.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:642: drivers/misc] Error 2
This file board_id.h does not exist in the include/ folder. Perhaps Xiaomi uploaded incomplete sources?

aureljared said:
tap2wake also works on PixelExperience, FWIW.
EDIT: board_id.h is present in the same directory, not in include/. \
I've tried compiling the kernel from Xiaomi's sources and stumbled across an error about a missing header file:
Code:
drivers/misc/st21nfc.c:43:22: fatal error: board_id.h: No such file or directory
#include <board_id.h>
^
compilation terminated.
make[2]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:338: drivers/misc/st21nfc.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:642: drivers/misc] Error 2
This file board_id.h does not exist in the include/ folder. Perhaps Xiaomi uploaded incomplete sources?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes

Much easier to compile this kernel using Clang rather than GCC. Still getting used to it, it's been a good while since my last kernel compile, haha.
Does anyone know how to build a new boot image by hand? I have a working boot.img for PixelExperience and I'd like to replace the kernel with one that I built for testing, but I'm not sure if I should still use mkbootimg like with older Android devices as this is the first time I'll be dealing with a device that uses dtb/dtbo files. Any insights would be welcome.
aureljared said:
EDIT: board_id.h is present in the same directory, not in include/.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Not an expert here. What exactly are the benefits of this? What does it mean for custom ROM development?

SAM209 said:
Not an expert here. What exactly are the benefits of this? What does it mean for custom ROM development?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For one, it is theoretically easier to keep the device up to date without having to wait for Xiaomi's updates. Some changes that come with Android's monthly security patches are made to the kernel, for example, and having the kernel source code means we can apply those patches faster than if we were to wait for updated kernel builds from Xiaomi.
Some ROMs like LineageOS also require kernels to be built from source (i.e., not prebuilt) for a device to be granted official status.

Hello,
Can someone guide me on how to install that kernel on redmi note 11 (Pixel Experience custom os)
Already installed twrp 3.7.0 but gives me some errors all the time like Invalid zip file format!.
I download it as zip from github and put it in twrp folder and install it from there.
Thanks in advance

jasmin811 said:
Hello,
Can someone guide me on how to install that kernel on redmi note 11 (Pixel Experience custom os)
Already installed twrp 3.7.0 but gives me some errors all the time like Invalid zip file format!.
I download it as zip from github and put it in twrp folder and install it from there.
Thanks in advance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's nothing to flash here. Only the link to the kernel source. There's still some work to do for a flashable kernel (compiling eg). Also there are drivers missing in the source it seems. What you tried was flashing the uncompiled kernel source package i guess and that.. doesn't work

Oh ok,I though it was finished already.