View Single Post
woody14619's Avatar
Posts: 1,455 | Thanked: 3,309 times | Joined on Dec 2009 @ Rochester, NY
#850
Originally Posted by karam View Post
speedpatch doesn't do permanent changes as woody stated
i have no idea why are you saying this
The current version does, in fact, do permanent changes. On install it replaces your .profile and .bashrc files, but fails to restore them when uninstalling. (See prerm and postinst for the deb if you don't believe me.) It also sets your kernel config to "default" which on most systems is (250-600), without mentioning it anywhere.

So, since I bothered to grab the latest versions to see what it actually does, lets take a look-see shall we?

All "speedpatch 2.0" seems to do is add a separate cgroup for CLI commands and adds shell-scripts to that cgroup as they run. Nowhere do I see it adding groups for desktop and applications, as stated in it's description. Which means it's not really doing anything but lumping shell scripts and xterms together into a shared cgroup. How does that help speed? Since most apps are not shell scripts, I don't see how that helps anything. Further, it depends on KP without specifying it as a pre-req. Everything I'm seeing would indicate that speedpatch has a better chance of slowing things down by setting the kernel back to default than it does speed things up.

As for Batterypatch 4.0: The current version also sets your config to default kernel config, on install and on uninstall. All it seems to do is set the nice levels on a few apps and loads a kernel config if your close the keyboard and it goes into sleep mode. Namely, it renices modest, browserd, image-viewer to a value of 1 and ignores nice loads. It loads a separate config for when you open it, and when a call is going on. I note that it tries to renice "background apps" via a call into /dev/cgroups, but unless you have speedpatch installed (not a pre-req!) it will find nothing there, as cgroups aren't mounted by default.

The "speed" from battery patch comes from the fact that you're heavily overclocking the system (705-850!) when the system is awake. For calls, you're using a (250-805) config that's closer to stock, but still overclocking. (Are you telling people that your scripts overclock their devices?) And for the sleeping system a (125-600) config that ignores nice loads.

This means when an app in the nice list (modest, browserd, etc) wake the system up to do something, when it's closed, it will run at 125Mhz until done. Weather this is even saving battery or not is questionable, since it's against the "race to finish" idea in multiple ways. Also, it's enabling 125Mhz, which just about everyone including Nokia, Titan, and Lehto believe is unstable.

So what does the combo of these two do? From what I'm seeing, next to nothing, except that it screws with your configuration, enables a kernel speed that Nokia and others avoid because it's unstable, and adds a user cgroup to lump scripts and shells together for sharing resources. Not something I'd care to inflict on anyone.

Originally Posted by karam View Post
so my question is
what is the bloody hell way to proove to you that speedpatch speeds up and batterypatch saves up ?

and please if you want to continue disscution
then do it in the dedicated thread
You've been asked, on several occasions (even on your dedicated thread) to explain what these patches are doing, and why it's helpful. You've declined to give much information at all, and what information you have given (the package description, for example) is patently false. So maybe that's where you should start in your "proof" of what either package does.

The fact that the entire install is nothing but scripts that tinker with kernel settings in a way you're incorrectly describing doesn't lend any confidence that anything you're saying about this is correct.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to woody14619 For This Useful Post: