Related
Ok..
I can push the modules into the appropriate folder on the phone and I can run the commands which add it to the cpu governer selection (it took me awhile to realise I had to run 'su' command first ooops!).
However, upon rebooting the smartass governer dissappears from the selection tab and returns to 'ondemand' even if restore upon boot is selected. I assume the module is only temporarily loaded via the 'insmod' and 'echo' commands.
So I pulled the hw_config.sh and added the commands to the end under a new #tag (for ease of keeping things seperate). The same commands listed in the smartass thread. Pushed in back to the phone, But... smartass still wouldn't load and the cpu governer switched permanantly to 'performance' - even when I removed the commands from the config file
Had to restore my cwm backup to fix the issue.
I noticed that the config file makes reference to the ondemand module so wondered if this causes conflict with the smartass one??
I'm fairly new to modding stuff. Anyone got smartass working on gintonic1.3? Can they tell me the proceedure they used?
Sent from my U20i using Tapatalk
sory,i u use minicm7 v7 u can use it w/o problem..just edit hw config.sh
#x8smartass
insmod /system/lib/modules/x8_smartass.ko
azadtaufiq said:
sory,i u use minicm7 v7 u can use it w/o problem..just edit hw config.sh
#x8smartass
insmod /system/lib/modules/x8_smartass.ko
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll give it a go. Thank you very much!
Sent from my U20i using Tapatalk
Hello friends! I really hate the vibrator function (yes, I love a quiet phone) and I will be very happy if someone know a way to totally disable the vibrator (well, let me explain, I don't want to open the phone and disconnect it...)
Each app can be configured individualy to vibrate or not (I know) and sound options lets you configure the vibration when the phone rings, but is very annoying to do it for each application, even when you have a lot of apps (it's my case)
I was googling for a module, a build.prop line, delete a file... no sucess...
Do you guys know a way to totally disable vibration?
Regards and merry Xmas
Havent tried myself, but you could delete the vibrator module so the kernel doesnt load it.
The module is located on /lib/modules/vibrator.ko
You should make a backup else where (just in case) and try to power the phone with it deleted to see if it all loads correctly and the vibrator should be disabled.
AzureusPT said:
Havent tried myself, but you could delete the vibrator module so the kernel doesnt load it.
The module is located on /lib/modules/vibrator.ko
You should make a backup else where (just in case) and try to power the phone with it deleted to see if it all loads correctly and the vibrator should be disabled.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your reply, but unfortunatelly this doesn't work, I tried it and the module recreates itself when phone is restarted. I also tried to unload it with a init.d script, using the command rmmod -f vibrator, but no sucess...
Checking the init.rc file I have the following line:
Code:
#ko files for vibrator
insmod /lib/modules/vibrator.ko
Have you tried commenting that line?
The init.rc file is located on the root / of the phone.
AzureusPT said:
Checking the init.rc file I have the following line:
Code:
#ko files for vibrator
insmod /lib/modules/vibrator.ko
Have you tried commenting that line?
The init.rc file is located on the root / of the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried it, but init.rc also recreates itself on every boot... I'm using SpeedMod K2-18 kernel, anyway to parse kernel parameters to disable vibrator module? Now, disable vibrator is a question of honor...
dani_mola said:
I tried it, but init.rc also recreates itself on every boot... I'm using SpeedMod K2-18 kernel, anyway to parse kernel parameters to disable vibrator module? Now, disable vibrator is a question of honor...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Use the leaked ICS builds as they do not have proper kernel support for the vibrator
I'm wanting to see what the V6 Scripts will do for CM7 but I cannot for the life of me get them to stick upon reboot.
I have them setup via Script Manger to run as root. I've gone in, did option 6 (0,4,10,12,14,15) and option 20.
Upon reboot, the settings in /sys/module/lowmemorykiller/parameters/adj are set back to the default CM7 settings
I've tried setting the properties in both local.prop and build.prop, but nothing seems to stick.
I've tried integrating the settings of the init.rc into the ROM and not doing that.
None of these options seems to make the low memory killer settings I set in V6 stick and it ALWAYS reverts back to the stock CM7 settings.
I know I can just rerun the script after it's done booting, but I never had to do this with other ROMs as it would integrate fine in /etc/init.d and run.
I see in the /etc/init.d a S99SuperCharger script with the correct permissions set. I can run it via sh and it sets the properties correctly.
It just seems that CM7 is overwriting the low memory settings somewhere and I don't know where. I don't see it occurring in any of the supplied scripts from CM7 in the /etc/init.d and I don't see it in the build.prop file.
Any ideas? I know I could just tell Script Manager to run the script on boot, but that's usually not recommended except as a last resort.
I guess the real reason I would like to get this working the way it normally does (via the init.d scripts) is just to understand what CM7 is really doing.
Thanks!
Perhaps CM7 has some sort of memory management of it's own that sets things back to the defaults on boot????????
I know, not much of an answer but it's the best I can come up with.
robocuff said:
Perhaps CM7 has some sort of memory management of it's own that sets things back to the defaults on boot????????
I know, not much of an answer but it's the best I can come up with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I figured is happening. I just have to determine where it's happening at.
I see that the V6 scripts are running, but something is setting it AFTER the init.d process is done.
I also checked the /data/SuperChargerRan log file and this is what I saw:
02-16-2012 09:20:53: Applied Settings from /system/etc/init.d/S99SuperCharger!
02-16-2012 09:20:54: DIDN'T Apply Settings from /data/99SuperCharger.sh!
Not sure why the second one isn't working.
Looking at the /sys/module/lowmemorykiller/parameters/adj file, it's back to the original settings that CM7 has: 0,1,2,4,7,15
iBolski said:
I'm wanting to see what the V6 Scripts will do for CM7 but I cannot for the life of me get them to stick upon reboot.
I have them setup via Script Manger to run as root. I've gone in, did option 6 (0,4,10,12,14,15) and option 20.
Upon reboot, the settings in /sys/module/lowmemorykiller/parameters/adj are set back to the default CM7 settings
I've tried setting the properties in both local.prop and build.prop, but nothing seems to stick.
I've tried integrating the settings of the init.rc into the ROM and not doing that.
None of these options seems to make the low memory killer settings I set in V6 stick and it ALWAYS reverts back to the stock CM7 settings.
I know I can just rerun the script after it's done booting, but I never had to do this with other ROMs as it would integrate fine in /etc/init.d and run.
I see in the /etc/init.d a S99SuperCharger script with the correct permissions set. I can run it via sh and it sets the properties correctly.
It just seems that CM7 is overwriting the low memory settings somewhere and I don't know where. I don't see it occurring in any of the supplied scripts from CM7 in the /etc/init.d and I don't see it in the build.prop file.
Any ideas? I know I could just tell Script Manager to run the script on boot, but that's usually not recommended except as a last resort.
I guess the real reason I would like to get this working the way it normally does (via the init.d scripts) is just to understand what CM7 is really doing.
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hehehehe... Me thinks you should search the forums a little bit. When I was testing cm7 for DZK, I tried EVERYTHING I used on previous ROMs, to include V6_SuperCharger. V6_SuperCharger DOES NOT WORK with CM7! The BIGGEST reason is the mapping for the memory slots are different with CM7, so fudging with them tends to cause massive issues and slowdowns. The reason it does not stick is most likely (speculation here) due to CM7 settings things back to it's optimized default settings.
Keep in mind that CM7 is an "optimized" AOSP based ROM... That means NO BLOATWARE! I am running with roughly 315 apps, most of which I use on a WEEKLY basis. Some, only monthly.
There are a few issues that I have noticed, root/su issues, sometimes system crashes on boot, sometime bluetooth crashes on boot, sometimes the dialer crashes... But with non-root apps, this thing SCREAMS!
Also, CM7 incorporates it's own memory management system that works better than the Moto Blur based ROMs. Just my two cents.
Ciao!
Moonshadow, thanks for the explanation. I did do a search and for some reason, your post didn't come up. Now that I search, I find it. I'll attribute it to an ID-10T or PEBKAC error.
iBolski said:
I'll attribute it to an ID-10T or PEBKAC error.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you REALLY sure about that??? It could be that Google just hiccuped during that nanosecond that your search on XDA was running... And didn't affect anyone elses searches...
You can be like Apple and blame/sue everyone else... (Just joking!)
Ciao!
Besides cm 7 does not need any script runs good as it is.
Hi, just a noob question.. how does it affect your phone's performance if you have double (or triple even) the entry of the same line of code in your build.prop file? example: if "pm.sleep_mode=1" appears twice in your build prop, would they cancel each other out? or if "wifi.supplicant_scan_interval=150" appears 3 times in your build prop, would they sum up (like scan interval =450)? or is it better to delete the duplicates (or triplicates) and just have 1 per line? thanks..
The last one on the list is applied, i.e. if you have nobootanimation 0 and then nobootanimation 1 it will not show bootanimation activating last line entered (how could two equal commands cancel each other out??)
Rudjgaard said:
The last one on the list is applied, i.e. if you have nobootanimation 0 and then nobootanimation 1 it will not show bootanimation activating last line entered (how could two equal commands cancel each other out??)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for the reply... i was just thinking that probably with 2 contradicting commands, system might be slower or perhaps crash (boot loop) or something... however, you think it would be better to clean up, meaning, in your example, to delete the nobootanimation 0 if you want to have no boot animation? because if there will be lots of duplicate entries, i would think that your system would slow down?? thanks..
there is no problem is there are double lines with same value
but it aint good if they are doubled with different values
It's always best to clean up double entries, i have a model build.prop where i sorted everything out nicely, with #and explanation of the tweaks below, put it at the bottom of the script and when flashing new roms you can just copy-paste the bottom part since little ever changes above the "additional build properties" line. Also it is best not to edit it directly from the phone, just pull it out, use notepad++ which can easily higlight parts of script and show you where it's repeated. If i am not mistaken build.prop is only used on boot, so it's not constantly "working" thus it isn't always computing conflicting cmds
mv_style said:
there is no problem is there are double lines with same value
but it aint good if they are doubled with different values
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rudjgaard said:
It's always best to clean up double entries, i have a model build.prop where i sorted everything out nicely, with #and explanation of the tweaks below, put it at the bottom of the script and when flashing new roms you can just copy-paste the bottom part since little ever changes above the "additional build properties" line. Also it is best not to edit it directly from the phone, just pull it out, use notepad++ which can easily higlight parts of script and show you where it's repeated. If i am not mistaken build.prop is only used on boot, so it's not constantly "working" thus it isn't always computing conflicting cmds
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks, both, for your reply... this is very helpful indeed...
nah, found this thread, for someone that who concern about this, just like me.
if this the case on build.prop, then how about on init.d?
i already checked on several ROM from somebodies that contains many many script/duplicate command, but in different script name.
in example just like value of nobootanimation is "1" or "0", this is conflicting, right.
i dont care if they just copy-paste it to init.D and forget to editing the script they use or what, then say it "Custom ROM" or "build from scratch", but im really currious is about effect of many duplicate tweak or conflict command on init.d.
someone, please enlighten me
Sent from my SK17i
Init.d is another bootup only instance, so it will only load the values on boot, if there are conflicting lines within the same script, as before, it will only load the last ones in the script, but if they are on separae scripts i don't know how it prioritizes the choices, but i am pretty sure it's not as safe as build.prop double edited lines (if you have 2 buil.prop files it will only load one) i used pimp my rom and added several tweaks and scripts (which were from all over the place and not well edited, such as thunderbolt script needs to be modified to suit your need for renice and memory tweaks) and on my already supercharged rom i would get kernel panic after the first reboot with a bootloop on bootloader starting process, always check what you're putting in your phone ((many scripts have functions disabled b a # at the beginning) and enable only things you need so they only run once. If you don't want to get messy just add a # at the beginning of every line of the script and that excludes them from booting
tomorrow i tried the new script of zeppelinrox
first i set it in local prop whith option integrate
in init rc without 3gtweak with rockandrole like kernel tweak
and with fixalingn i put clean e restart and all right but
my luncher was not supetcharger so i had 75%
like explain the script i used so the option of buid prop
i rebooted and i had 50% supetcharger...mmmm...
iclean all with unsupetcharger and i tried another time
i set buid.prop integrate in init.rc superminfree calculator set
rock and roll no 3gtweak yes to other tweak i superclean and
restart and my phone stuck on samsung logo
i put out the bactery and reboot and when i run the script
told me that it detected a bootloop...i tied another time but with
same result
edit:if after rerun the script i reboot after i ve got 100%
but with next reboot i ve bootloop....
help me thanks
angel.sea said:
tomorrow i tried the new script of zeppelinrox
first i set it in local prop whith option integrate
in init rc without 3gtweak with rockandrole like kernel tweak
and with fixalingn i put clean e restart and all right but
my luncher was not supetcharger so i had 75%
like explain the script i used so the option of buid prop
i rebooted and i had 50% supetcharger...mmmm...
iclean all with unsupetcharger and i tried another time
i set buid.prop integrate in init.rc superminfree calculator set
rock and roll no 3gtweak yes to other tweak i superclean and
restart and my phone stuck on samsung logo
i put out the bactery and reboot and when i run the script
told me that it detected a bootloop...i tied another time but with
same result
help me thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did you get that script? Can't find it on his thread..
anmino said:
Where did you get that script? Can't find it on his thread..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
here there is the page of thread where there is
the script http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=991276&page=1896
if someone try it we can resolve the problem
thanx a lot guy