maemo.org - Talk - Overclock the N900?

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)

- Nokia N900 (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=44)

- - Overclock the N900? (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=39753)

Re: Overclock the N900?

Quote:

Originally Posted by thecube (Post 598540)

where do I find the dmesg ?

Type it within X Terminal

Re: Overclock the N900?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronaldo (Post 598513)

i did dmesg but not sure what i need to look out for, had 900mhz for over 2 days

Lines like

Code:

[ 61.040965] UBIFS error (pid 1): ubifs_read_node: bad node at LEB 0:0

are very bad. The numbers could be different but basically keep an eye for "UBIFS error". You can quickly check for it using

Code:

dmesg | grep "UBIFS error"

Corruption might also result in rootfs becoming read-only, causing all kinds of strange effects (most noticeably, the inability to install anything, problems sending and receiving SMS...).

Kernel warnings show up as

Code:

[ 63.332763] WARNING: at arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock34xx.c:443 omap3_noncore_dpll_set_rate+0x28c/0x2dc()

followed by a large amount of "crap". At least that was what I got when running at too high clock frequency. Again, the numbers could be different but you can

Code:

dmesg | grep WARNING

Quote:

Originally Posted by skunkonkrunk (Post 598516)

i'd like to know why some devices can cope with it and others just hate it.

Manufacturing differences in silicon.

Re: Overclock the N900?

This is just theory some users have reported that their devices cannot make the 900mhz mark...

Has anyone with this problem tried flashing the entire phone and reinstalling the kernels whilst the phone is in a completely clean state(meaning it has no additional programs installed only factory applications)?.

The reason being some softwares (specifically devel software) may actually be causing the problems. It's highly unlikely that overclocking would corrupt the file system unless it was software related. From my experience the problems overclocking cause are almost always hardware related.

Scenarios that may contribute users being unable to clock at 900mhz include:

1) having and older firmware

2) having lots of devel apps installed

3) small root fs space

4) having a specific program/widget/daemon being unable to cope with the new clock rate thereby causing other probs and corrupting the file system.

5) Having system hacks/scripts installed before trying out the new kernels

Of course this is all just theory. It hasn't been proven.

My advice would be to reflash the phone and before installing any other apps, try out the 900mhz kernel to see if it causes probs. Then and only then could we determine if it's actually software related or hardware related.

Re: Overclock the N900?

Code:

axpacket 512 

[ 8033.352966] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep3out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[ 8033.620880] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[ 8033.620910] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[ 8033.655212] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[ 8033.655273] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[ 8050.174133] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[ 8050.174163] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[ 8050.459136] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep3in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[ 8050.459197] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep3out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[ 8050.494537] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep3in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[ 8050.494567] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep3out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[ 8185.777069] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep1out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[ 8185.777099] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep1in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[ 8185.811523] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep1out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[ 8185.811553] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep1in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[ 8658.596008] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now closed 

[ 8658.814636] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now open 

[ 8662.744354] wl1251: 151 tx blocks at 0x3b788, 35 rx blocks at 0x3a780 

[ 8662.759948] wl1251: firmware booted (Rev 4.0.4.3.7) 

[ 8663.596252] wl1251: down 

[ 8666.197723] wl1251: 151 tx blocks at 0x3b788, 35 rx blocks at 0x3a780 

[ 8666.213134] wl1251: firmware booted (Rev 4.0.4.3.7) 

[ 8667.112762] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 8667.115264] wlan0: authenticated 

[ 8667.115295] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 8667.118347] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[ 8667.118377] wlan0: associated 

[ 9127.158355] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now closed 

[ 9127.408386] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now open 

[ 9137.081878] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[ 9137.809265] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9138.002105] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9138.197540] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9138.392822] wlan0: authentication with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 timed out 

[ 9139.113800] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9139.306976] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9139.309417] wlan0: authenticated 

[ 9139.309448] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9139.312500] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[ 9139.312500] wlan0: associated 

[ 9811.525695] slide (GPIO 71) is now open 

[ 9811.669708] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[ 9812.811279] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9813.002075] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9813.005126] wlan0: authenticated 

[ 9813.005157] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[ 9813.008178] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=3) 

[ 9813.008209] wlan0: associated 

[ 9860.682403] slide (GPIO 71) is now closed 

[10097.963134] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now closed 

[10098.166168] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now open 

[10103.721008] slide (GPIO 71) is now open 

[10171.259948] slide (GPIO 71) is now closed 

[10182.033477] slide (GPIO 71) is now open 

[10187.869873] slide (GPIO 71) is now closed 

[10299.391571] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[10300.083679] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10300.104461] wlan0: authenticated 

[10300.104492] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10300.108032] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[10300.108062] wlan0: associated 

[10364.821472] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[10366.136260] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10366.330383] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10366.525665] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10366.528198] wlan0: authenticated 

[10366.528198] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10366.532653] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[10366.532684] wlan0: associated 

[10499.095947] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now closed 

[10499.237976] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[10499.432006] wlan0: direct probe to AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 try 1 

[10499.437072] wlan0 direct probe responded 

[10499.437103] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10499.439575] wlan0: authenticated 

[10499.439575] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10499.442413] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[10499.442443] wlan0: associated 

[10499.463043] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now open 

[10855.236633] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now closed 

[10855.431793] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now open 

[10871.122802] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[10871.817352] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10872.010040] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10872.013397] wlan0: authenticated 

[10872.013427] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10872.016601] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[10872.016601] wlan0: associated 

[10940.840698] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[10942.151824] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10942.346008] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10942.541320] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10942.736602] wlan0: authentication with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 timed out 

[10943.142822] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10943.338165] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10943.533508] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10943.537902] wlan0: authenticated 

[10943.537933] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[10943.541015] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[10943.541046] wlan0: associated 

[11383.455871] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[11384.155609] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11384.160491] wlan0: authenticated 

[11384.160522] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11384.163635] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[11384.163635] wlan0: associated 

[11833.958007] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[11833.958068] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[11833.993286] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[11833.993316] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[11844.286682] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[11844.286712] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[11844.320983] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2in for bulk IN, maxpacket 512 

[11844.321014] musb_hdrc periph: enabled ep2out for bulk OUT, maxpacket 512 

[11869.455902] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[11870.511993] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11870.705200] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11870.900543] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11871.095825] wlan0: authentication with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 timed out 

[11871.711730] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11871.900512] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11872.095855] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11872.291168] wlan0: authentication with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 timed out 

[11872.816955] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11873.009918] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11873.013061] wlan0: authenticated 

[11873.013122] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11873.017822] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[11873.017822] wlan0: associated 

[11939.890197] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[11941.092681] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11941.283538] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11941.478790] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11941.674133] wlan0: authentication with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 timed out 

[11942.318695] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11942.510070] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11942.705352] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11942.900695] wlan0: authentication with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 timed out 

[11943.599243] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11943.791351] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11943.794067] wlan0: authenticated 

[11943.794097] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[11943.800354] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[11943.800384] wlan0: associated 

[12049.806915] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now closed 

[12050.049011] kb_lock (GPIO 113) is now open 

[12050.401458] wlan0: deauthenticated 

[12051.693542] wlan0: authenticate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[12051.697692] wlan0: authenticated 

[12051.697723] wlan0: associate with AP 00:24:01:c5:03:30 

[12051.701110] wlan0: RX AssocResp from 00:24:01:c5:03:30 (capab=0x431 status=0 aid=1) 

[12051.701110] wlan0: associated 

[12063.970947] slide (GPIO 71) is now open 

~ $ 

~ $

Re: Overclock the N900?

I am running Lethos 125-800 mhz kernel for two days now and so far no crashes or heat probs. :o
The only thing that was corrupted is the contacts icon in the main menu. It shows some small graphical errors (wrong colors, thin colored lines and s***t...) Otherwise is absolutely stable...

So far so good,but i wanted to test changes in battery time and started to compare the original 600mhz kernel vs. the 125-800mhz one from lethos using battery graph.

In this test i played an xvid encoded Avi movie with headphones plugged in at 50% volume. Check out the results:

Left side: 600mhz kernel Right side: 800mhz kernel

Green: Voltage
Red: Percent Charge
Purple: cpu load

You can see that i extrapolated the red percentage charge graph in the right image because i had a short pause in video playback (vid was over had to play it again). But it doesnt affect the result, graphs are parallel and nearly linear.
However, as you can see the battery consumption difference between the two processor speeds is negligible when it comes to video playback.

Btw processors where running at 600mhz or 800mhz repectively, i checked that on conky.

RESULT: When watching xvid video with mediaplayer, it doesn't matter if you run 600 or 800mhz...battery drain is the same.

More tests are coming;).

Re: Overclock the N900?

Quote:

Originally Posted by istarskyypsilon (Post 598563)

heat is what we really need to measure.

Re: Overclock the N900?

is there a possibility that phones from different countries can support different cpu frequencies??

for e.g mine says made in Finland... My previous one was made in Korea or somewhere like that...

ideas??

whoever cannot get past 800mhz or so, can you give the country it was designed?? thats just a guess.... its written at the back of the screen when you open the keyboard

Re: Overclock the N900?

Quote:

Originally Posted by hqh (Post 598549)

Lines like

Code:

[ 61.040965] UBIFS error (pid 1): ubifs_read_node: bad node at LEB 0:0

are very bad. The numbers could be different but basically keep an eye for "UBIFS error". You can quickly check for it using

Code:

dmesg | grep "UBIFS error"

Code:

[ 63.332763] WARNING: at arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock34xx.c:443 omap3_noncore_dpll_set_rate+0x28c/0x2dc()

followed by a large amount of "crap". At least that was what I got when running at too high clock frequency. Again, the numbers could be different but you can

Code:

dmesg | grep WARNING

Manufacturing differences in silicon.

Running @ 800MHz and i tought it was stable, but after checking warnings i found those dpll_set_rate crap. Are you sure those are bad things to found? I mean if it caused just because different clock speed? No ubifs errors here.

Re: Overclock the N900?

Quote:

Originally Posted by UNderworld (Post 598567)

some cpu would come from better die the others, its same as a PC cpu, they have stepping numbers to show which silicon the die came from, some OC better then others.

exmaple :AMD64 2500-M(mobile) came from same die as AMD64 FX series, so the 2500-M (1.8ghz) would clock to 2.6ghz with same vcore as FX but usually less.

Re: Overclock the N900?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavageD (Post 598558)

This is just theory some users have reported that their devices cannot make the 900mhz mark...

It's not a theory about not getting there, it's the consequences of exceeding the capabilities of the hardware.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavageD (Post 598558)

The reason being some softwares (specifically devel software) may actually be causing the problems. It's highly unlikely that overclocking would corrupt the file system unless it was software related. From my experience the problems overclocking cause are almost always hardware related.

Unlikely, maybe. Impossible, definitely not. Having (even slight) hardware related problems definitely affects the software running on it...

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavageD (Post 598558)

Scenarios that may contribute users being unable to clock at 900mhz include:

It's about the hardware, not installed software. If some piece of installed software starts misbehaving on an overclocked device, its a sign that the device hardware can't handle the speed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavageD (Post 598558)

Then and only then could we determine if it's actually software related or hardware related.

We already know not every device is able to reach the same speeds due to hardware (manufacturing) differences in chips. The point of my posts was that whatever you'r device's limit is, exceeding it might cause subtle problems that are not immediately visible and might need some attention.