GPU source has been released for Rasperry PI [LINK]
Take a look and discuss
Mohamed.Anwar said:
GPU source has been released for Rasperry PI [LINK]
Take a look and discuss
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hmm is it released by broadcom?
as what nick from broadcom has stated,
the ras pi and SGY have different broadcom chipsets so different drivers
Devs have already tried using these drivers but all have failed as these are incompatible.
Thread Closed, seems that this is irrelevant to the Galaxy Y as the chipsets are different so the drivers won't work.
Related
Based on this link, http://blog.gsmarena.com/cyanogenmod-cancels-support-for-first-generation-snapdragon-devices/
Just for clarification/validation purposes, Samsung Galaxy W is not affected, right?
yes it is not written there. maybe. i hope not
erickho0407 said:
Based on this link, http://blog.gsmarena.com/cyanogenmod-cancels-support-for-first-generation-snapdragon-devices/
Just for clarification/validation purposes, Samsung Galaxy W is not affected, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is not mentioned and it has another SOC
the
MSM8255T
and this SOC is not mentioned in the article
I just came across this.
http://www.techradar.com/news/phone...-d-quad-is-as-powerful-as-a-64-bit-pc-1066474
It boasts of Ascend D quad being 64bit. But i checked the specs of both Ascend D as well as the newer D2 and both are k3v2 quad core 1.5ghz. So either p6 is 64bit too or Ascend D isnt 64bit.
Edit: Here too: http://www.hisilicon.com/news/news/k3v2_20120226.html
So I wonder how this unique feature that only few newer mobiles recently got can help huawei mobiles do stuff that others cannot. :?
http://www.cnx-software.com/2012/02/27/hisilicon-unveils-quad-core-cortex-a9-k3v2-processor-hi3620/
The mobile hardware and software ecosystem is already moving in the direction of 64-bit; and, the evolution to 64-bit brings desktop class capabilities and user experiences to mobile, as well as enabling mobile processors and software to run new classes of computing devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://m.androidauthority.com/qualcomm-retracts-64-bit-comment-281738/
Huawei should make use of the 64bit capabilities in Emotion 2.0 and show it off a bit.
warea said:
http://m.androidauthority.com/qualcomm-retracts-64-bit-comment-281738/
Huawei should make use of the 64bit capabilities in Emotion 2.0 and show it off a bit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You need obviously 64 bit CPU
When Will Android Embrace the 64-Bit Chip?
http://www.androidheadlines.com/2013/10/ah-primetime-will-android-embrace-64-bit-chip.html
Any chance of having cynogenmod or slimkat on x or xl.
I want my next phone to be supported by those.
Thanks
Sent from my LT26i using xda premium
There was news some time ago that Abhisek Devkota has a device and probably working on it. Need to wait a bit more. Device is not on the market yet, well it is starting to be sold so we need to wait. Although I think that even though specs are not super this phone will be very interesting option if equipped with CM11.
link to source info
https://plus.google.com/+AbhisekDevkota/posts/XumB6ymaJeb?utm_source=ausdroid.net
well nokia x and nokia xl have the same hardware and system with my phone s100
current roms available are
cm10
miui v5
lewa os 5
and my ported nokia x rom
hopefully if cm11 will be available on your phone then it will be available to use too...
did nokia released source code ..?
nope.. just system dump and boot.img
that's sad
rebelos said:
did nokia released source code ..?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are there any information if they are going to realease it? Samsung does also push their sources just a while after the realeas of a phone.
KingDani1997 said:
Are there any information if they are going to realease it? Samsung does also push their sources just a while after the realeas of a phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah! i m damn confused on it since kernel source code is mandatory .. they released nokia X and variants here (india) .. but no sign of GNU/Linux source code
rebelos said:
yeah! i m damn confused on it since kernel source code is mandatory .. they released nokia X and variants here (india) .. but no sign of GNU/Linux source code
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are the companies who use the AOSP as 'base' for their ROMs committed to realease the sources?
KingDani1997 said:
Are the companies who use the AOSP as 'base' for their ROMs committed to realease the sources?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not the rom source code but they have to release kernel source code and it is mandatory for every company that's why oems like sony , htc , samsung , oppo and many more release kernel source code
rebelos said:
not the rom source code but they have to release kernel source code and it is mandatory for every company that's why oems like sony , htc , samsung , oppo and many more release kernel source code
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We could write an Email.. Maybe they will tell us when they are going to release it. I don't know the release date of the the Nokia Xs, but I think they are going to push the sources a few days after the phone got released. Samsung and all the other companies are doing it the same way. Before I bought a N5, I have had an Ace II and we never got a full source code. Functions like OMX were very hard to get working without these sources. So we can just hope that they are dev-friendly and release a complete kernel source.
KingDani1997 said:
We could write an Email.. Maybe they will tell us when they are going to release it. I don't know the release date of the the Nokia Xs, but I think they are going to push the sources a few days after the phone got released. Samsung and all the other companies are doing it the same way. Before I bought a N5, I have had an Ace II and we never got a full source code. Functions like OMX were very hard to get working without these sources. So we can just hope that they are dev-friendly and release a complete kernel source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think they will release source code in coming days .. rest of things will be decided after Source released
rebelos said:
i think they will release source code in coming days .. rest of things will be decided after Source released
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As soon as a source compiled rom like CM or something gets posted i am going to buy a Nokia X. I don't need it, but it is cool to play with it
If bettery life is amazing my next phone would be nokia xl
Sent from my LT26i using xda premium
I would advise neither, coming from a device that uses a similar SoC. you don't have full hardware acceleration on newer android versions, and the gpu is really not all that good..
I would advise staying clear of the Nokia X
cybojenix said:
I would advise neither, coming from a device that uses a similar SoC. you don't have full hardware acceleration on newer android versions, and the gpu is really not all that good..
I would advise staying clear of the Nokia X
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, it is true, on my huawei y300 (same cpu and gpu) on kitkat there is not full HWA, ui is laggy and play games is very bad, this because qualcomm does not release adreno 200 drivers for android 4.3-4.4... hope that the cm team can do something
fonz93 said:
Yes, it is true, on my huawei y300 (same cpu and gpu) on kitkat there is not full HWA, ui is laggy and play games is very bad, this because qualcomm does not release adreno 200 drivers for android 4.3-4.4... hope that the cm team can do something
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
err, it's because we don't support 4 layer composition. nothing to do with the adreno blobs
Kitkat not possible on Nokia X then?
cybojenix said:
err, it's because we don't support 4 layer composition. nothing to do with the adreno blobs
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, i dont know so much about this, can you explain? thanks
Cm news
"During our trip to MWC at the end of February we were able to secure an X from the Nokia team. There has been a substantial interest in this device from the community. While we won’t commit to releasing a proper ‘release’ (the hardware is more than a bit lacking) we have sent our X to dhacker29 to get up a source tree for the community. Just because CM won’t release a build doesn’t mean we can’t help other ROMs in the process. Nokia, to their credit, has already provided kernel source upon request and the bootloader is unlocked on this device – plenty of fun for the community to be had"
dhacker 29 is a very good developer hy is mantling the official cm for moto g
I have a SGT 3 GT-P5210 running Android 4.2.2 . But for some developing reasons I want to downgrade it to 4.0.3 ICS.
I have searched a lot on the web, but I couldn't find not even 1 ROM for 4.0.3 dedicated for my device.
I also have a look at this xda thread but nobody gives an answer in the end: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2582179
I am actually thinking that it is completely impossible to find a ROM for my purposes, due to many reasons.
Is this right? Or does anyone have a link at such a ROM?
The scenario of just trying to flash a ROM of SGT 2 won't work due to the Intel Atom Processor of GT 3...Not saying that it could work otherwise...
Thanks in advance.
If you every heard of porting then google how to port and there is a lot of guides, so that can help you make a rom for your own then if it works upload it and share it with community
Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk
Ripshock said:
If you every heard of porting then google how to port and there is a lot of guides, so that can help you make a rom for your own then if it works upload it and share it with community
Sent from my SM-T210R using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I googled for porting and I found some very interesting articles and guides. But it seems it is not possible for my purposes. The Port ROM has to be for the same processor type (Galaxy Tab 3 -> Intel Atom) and of the same manufacturer as of the Base ROM's (Samsung doesn't have an Intel tablet with Android ICS available..). In some guides I also read that the Android versions have to be of the same type, which is the opposite of what I want.
Porting from Galaxy Tab 2 will ,almost definitely, won't work since it has an ARM processor. But I will try it to ensure that it will fail.
Building from source is also impossible, because several vendor components will be needed, which are proprietary, and as a result, unavailable.
I will let you know when I brick my Tab 3 with Tab 2 ROM.
Nick_Pro said:
I googled for porting and I found some very interesting articles and guides. But it seems it is not possible for my purposes. The Port ROM has to be for the same processor type (Galaxy Tab 3 -> Intel Atom) and of the same manufacturer as of the Base ROM's (Samsung doesn't have an Intel tablet with Android ICS available..). In some guides I also read that the Android versions have to be of the same type, which is the opposite of what I want.
Porting from Galaxy Tab 2 will ,almost definitely, won't work since it has an ARM processor. But I will try it to ensure that it will fail.
Building from source is also impossible, because several vendor components will be needed, which are proprietary, and as a result, unavailable.
I will let you know when I brick my Tab 3 with Tab 2 ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why are you so n00b ???
Trying to flash a Tab 2 ROM on a Tab 3 ?
Architectures are VERY different,
Processor are different,
GPU are different,
RAM modules (DDR3L vs DDR2) are different,
Sound Cards are different,
So how could you port this ?
Have you already wondered WHY development of Tab 3 10.1 is too SLOW ?
Good luck with your port.
Btw, if you want the most smoothest ROM released for Tab 3 10.1, flash this http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2693396 :good:
It's an awesome rom with many features like Multi-Window
Sent from my GT-P5210 running on amtrom hd
Do you believe that the thread of oppo find 7 should separated in two: oppo find 7 and oppo find 7a? Do you believe that there will be need for this when the roms start to come out?
purplexed9 said:
Do you believe that the thread of oppo find 7 should separated in two: oppo find 7 and oppo find 7a? Do you believe that there will be need for this when the roms start to come out?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Makes sense to me.
I don't think there will be a need. It is sounding like the same rom will work for both and they come with the same software. Outside of screen calibration and impressions there is nothing much to make into a separate section as what applies to one applies to all. Unless of course future QHD owners aren't wanting to soil themselves by associating with the unfortunate vanilla 7A owners, that certainly calls for a new section. lol
No way will the same ROM work with all 4 versions of the F7. Just between the 7/7A there's 2 different processors. Maybe that could be settled with just a different kernel but I doubt it.
People are already using the same rom on two variants of the 7A and their tech guru is claiming the same rom with an auto detect could work for both the 7 and 7A. Tech guru is far from a word that would be used to describe me however. I'm sure entropy or one of the other guys will come along and set us (me) straight. Were it to be the case that different roms were required it would probably be a good idea to split the development section into two although that doesn't seem to be proof against people installing the wrong rom version as I've seen on many other phones.
About 90% of Oppo's deltas between 7 and 7A are handled at runtime by the kernel using a PCB version register.
Oppo's naming conventions are a bit confusing:
Find 7A = find7 (kernel defconfig)
Find 7 = find7wx (kernel defconfig) = Find 7S (kernel comments)
Find 7 OnePlus Edition = find7op (kernel source) = OnePlus One (what OnePlus calls it)
There are a few small things in the kernel that are handled by defconfigs instead of runtime - none of us have looked to see if these can be all switched to runtime because we don't have FHD 7 units yet.
Ideally there will be a common build. Worst case there will be a defconfig delta and 99% of the code will be common and (probably) the end result will be a common thread for omni (I hope...) Kind of like if I bothered to create a thread for galaxys2-family devices for Omni, I'd probably just create a unified one for I9100/I777/N7000 at this point. (maybe not N7000 but def. I777/I9100)
No. For the same reason why all the different Galaxy S4 variants are kept under the Galaxy S4 thread.
Hellscythe said:
No. For the same reason why all the different Galaxy S4 variants are kept under the Galaxy S4 thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Still, create a different f7 variant under the main f7 thread. As I have written, separate the devices of the thread, not create a completely new thread.
Sent from my P6-U06 using xda app-developers app
Hellscythe said:
No. For the same reason why all the different Galaxy S4 variants are kept under the Galaxy S4 thread.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um what? Every single carrier variant of the GS4 was given its own entire forum (not just an Exynos/Qcom split). (in retrospect probably a bad idea, but not surprising given Samsung's prior track record)
Also, "thread" is probably not the appropriate term for what the OP was asking.
Entropy512 said:
Find 7A = find7 (kernel defconfig)
Find 7 = find7wx (kernel defconfig) = Find 7S (kernel comments)
Find 7 OnePlus Edition = find7op (kernel source) = OnePlus One (what OnePlus calls it)
777/I9100)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is the hardware in the OnePlus One and the Find 7 really that similar? Or was this said partly tongue-in-cheek?
bobbarker2 said:
Is the hardware in the OnePlus One and the Find 7 really that similar? Or was this said partly tongue-in-cheek?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is.
Between OnePlus' relation with Oppo, the documented specifications, etc. - Pretty much every difference in the defconfigs/source for the two devices corresponds to the few documented differences in specs between the two devices.
The OnePlus One is a Find 7a with the following tweaks:
1) Nonremovable battery (kernel change: battery authentication disabled)
2) A PN65T instead of PN544 (kernel change: PN65 support in the NFC driver. The PN65 is pointless now that Google has sunsetted hardware SE support)
3) RGB LED instead of the blue-only Skyline (kernel change: different LED driver)
4) Left/right "mirror" reversal. (power button on right of OnePlus, left for F7a, etc.) Kernel change: none
5) MSM8974AC instead of MSM8974AB (kernel change: none, handled automatically at runtime)
farfromovin said:
No way will the same ROM work with all 4 versions of the F7. Just between the 7/7A there's 2 different processors. Maybe that could be settled with just a different kernel but I doubt it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Addel (product manager for oppo) just confirmed that the same 2.0 beta download can be installed on both 7 and 7a phones. It would seem that roms that don't include the baseband can be installed across the platform.
krabman said:
Addel (product manager for oppo) just confirmed that the same 2.0 beta download can be installed on both 7 and 7a phones. It would seem that roms that don't include the baseband can be installed across the platform.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I saw that and stand corrected. You gotta cut me a little slack, coming from a Samsung background where every single variant, along with basebands, cause huge issues. Glad to see it done simple from Oppo.
krabman said:
Addel (product manager for oppo) just confirmed that the same 2.0 beta download can be installed on both 7 and 7a phones. It would seem that roms that don't include the baseband can be installed across the platform.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
could also be the software baseband compatible with both versions of the hardware modem
(nexus 5 US and int'l phones use the same software modem, though supporting different LTE bands)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/goo...t/modem-nexus-5-flashable-modems-efs-t2514095
Entropy512 said:
It is.
Between OnePlus' relation with Oppo, the documented specifications, etc. - Pretty much every difference in the defconfigs/source for the two devices corresponds to the few documented differences in specs between the two devices.
The OnePlus One is a Find 7a with the following tweaks:
1) Nonremovable battery (kernel change: battery authentication disabled)
2) A PN65T instead of PN544 (kernel change: PN65 support in the NFC driver. The PN65 is pointless now that Google has sunsetted hardware SE support)
3) RGB LED instead of the blue-only Skyline (kernel change: different LED driver)
4) Left/right "mirror" reversal. (power button on right of OnePlus, left for F7a, etc.) Kernel change: none
5) MSM8974AC instead of MSM8974AB (kernel change: none, handled automatically at runtime)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So after things get rolling: Find7, Find7a, and OPO owners should be able to flash roms for all devices, followed up by the correct kernel?
Yes. That's pretty much the expected outcome.
Sent from my X9006 using Tapatalk
farfromovin said:
So after things get rolling: Find7, Find7a, and OPO owners should be able to flash roms for all devices, followed up by the correct kernel?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If we can't do a unified kernel, we'll be doing separate complete builds for both. But you could expect in that case we'll have something similar to the Samsung Galaxy S2 family, where the I9100, I777, and N7000 all inherit a "common" device tree that contains 95%+ of the stuff for each device.