Active Topics
-
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 2 days, 5 hrs ago -
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (28)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smartblu9 - 2 days, 6 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 2 days, 21 hrs ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (11)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 3 days, 19 hrs ago -
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 5 days, 2 hrs ago - more...
freemangordon |
2012-01-31
, 21:31
|
|
Posts: 3,074 |
Thanked: 12,964 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ Sofia,Bulgaria
|
#2681
|
Originally Posted by woody14619
The problem is fixed, lets go on.
|
|
2012-02-01
, 00:42
|
|
Posts: 31 |
Thanked: 50 times |
Joined on Jan 2012
@ Ireland
|
#2682
|
Originally Posted by freemangordon
I installed the kernel, kernel-modules and kernel-flasher packages linked-to in your post, and performed the following test sequence.
Disconnect issue is fixed in the kernel from here
Is there anything else not working as it should?
1. Connected BH-214 headset via Bluetooth.
2. Started music playback on stock player.
3. Used pause/play button to pause and restart music.
4. Used answer/hang-up button on headset to answer incoming call, and then used answer/hang-up button again to end call.
5. Initiated outgoing call from handset dialler, then used answer/hang-up button on headset to end call.
In all cases, I observed correct functionality. Music playback paused and resumed automatically with no degradation of sound quality. Call quality was satisfactory. My conclusion is that the BH-214 headset works correctly with this kernel.
Many thanks for your work. A final question: is there a version of the kernel-power-settings package which is compatible with this kernel?
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to zerox For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2012-02-01
, 06:56
|
|
Posts: 3,074 |
Thanked: 12,964 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ Sofia,Bulgaria
|
#2683
|
Originally Posted by zerox
Use that from repo (v 0.13)
... A final question: is there a version of the kernel-power-settings package which is compatible with this kernel?
|
|
2012-02-01
, 10:50
|
|
Posts: 81 |
Thanked: 22 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#2684
|
Hi all guys
I'm from Italy, member of smartphonetab.net community, where a lot of italian n900's owner works together to carry on our loved smartphone.
We found a problem, occurred after the installation of the latest PK version. Many of us, almost all of us, are suffering from heavy battery drain.
After some months of testing we found two different possible causes of the problem.
- First is the concurrency of the Battery patch installation with the latest version of PK. It seems that many of us experienced heavy battery drain in standby mode (eg, during the night, no wifi, no bt, no widget, no data connection, 2g module locked), solved only after removing battery patch (reflashing the n900 without installing it again is the safest way to leave this first problem behind us)
- The second one, still unsolved, is (again..) a huge battery drain when using the n900 (eg, wifi browsing, reproducing media, the tipical use of a smartphone). Most of us observed that the effective battery life in now half than what usual without power kernel or with a previous version of this. Wondering why this strange behavours occurs only with PK49, we noticed that in the version 49's changelog is indicated a new version of the bq27x00 module.
We also observed that the recharging time is now limited only at 2 hrs (from empty to full ), when with the previous PK versions (and with the stock one too) is around 3-4 hrs (from empty to full).
One of our users removed PK49 on a n900 suffering this kind of trouble, reinstalling the version 48. He got it, now the phone is back to a normal drain of the battery, excluding an hardware failure.
I'm asking you if someone here noticed the same kind of problem with the PK49 and if Pali has been informed that something is wrong with battery management.
Concluding i ask you sorry for my bad language, i never speak english in my normal life so I am a bit rusty ^^
Cheers
d!
I'm from Italy, member of smartphonetab.net community, where a lot of italian n900's owner works together to carry on our loved smartphone.
We found a problem, occurred after the installation of the latest PK version. Many of us, almost all of us, are suffering from heavy battery drain.
After some months of testing we found two different possible causes of the problem.
- First is the concurrency of the Battery patch installation with the latest version of PK. It seems that many of us experienced heavy battery drain in standby mode (eg, during the night, no wifi, no bt, no widget, no data connection, 2g module locked), solved only after removing battery patch (reflashing the n900 without installing it again is the safest way to leave this first problem behind us)
- The second one, still unsolved, is (again..) a huge battery drain when using the n900 (eg, wifi browsing, reproducing media, the tipical use of a smartphone). Most of us observed that the effective battery life in now half than what usual without power kernel or with a previous version of this. Wondering why this strange behavours occurs only with PK49, we noticed that in the version 49's changelog is indicated a new version of the bq27x00 module.
We also observed that the recharging time is now limited only at 2 hrs (from empty to full ), when with the previous PK versions (and with the stock one too) is around 3-4 hrs (from empty to full).
One of our users removed PK49 on a n900 suffering this kind of trouble, reinstalling the version 48. He got it, now the phone is back to a normal drain of the battery, excluding an hardware failure.
I'm asking you if someone here noticed the same kind of problem with the PK49 and if Pali has been informed that something is wrong with battery management.
Concluding i ask you sorry for my bad language, i never speak english in my normal life so I am a bit rusty ^^
Cheers
d!
|
|
2012-02-01
, 11:02
|
|
Posts: 2,154 |
Thanked: 8,464 times |
Joined on May 2010
|
#2685
|
Originally Posted by thedarkus
Battery patch is not part of kernel-power and is not developed by people around kernel-power. So report problem about battery patch in other thread.
Hi all guys
I'm from Italy, member of smartphonetab.net community, where a lot of italian n900's owner works together to carry on our loved smartphone.
We found a problem, occurred after the installation of the latest PK version. Many of us, almost all of us, are suffering from heavy battery drain.
After some months of testing we found two different possible causes of the problem.
- First is the concurrency of the Battery patch installation with the latest version of PK. It seems that many of us experienced heavy battery drain in standby mode (eg, during the night, no wifi, no bt, no widget, no data connection, 2g module locked), solved only after removing battery patch (reflashing the n900 without installing it again is the safest way to leave this first problem behind us)
Originally Posted by thedarkus
In kernel-power v49 is bq27x00_battery module DISABLED by default (blacklisted in /etc/modprobe.d/*blacklist*), so it is not caused by this module.
- The second one, still unsolved, is (again..) a huge battery drain when using the n900 (eg, wifi browsing, reproducing media, the tipical use of a smartphone). Most of us observed that the effective battery life in now half than what usual without power kernel or with a previous version of this. Wondering why this strange behavours occurs only with PK49, we noticed that in the version 49's changelog is indicated a new version of the bq27x00 module.
We also observed that the recharging time is now limited only at 2 hrs (from empty to full ), when with the previous PK versions (and with the stock one too) is around 3-4 hrs (from empty to full).
One of our users removed PK49 on a n900 suffering this kind of trouble, reinstalling the version 48. He got it, now the phone is back to a normal drain of the battery, excluding an hardware failure.
I'm asking you if someone here noticed the same kind of problem with the PK49 and if Pali has been informed that something is wrong with battery management.
Concluding i ask you sorry for my bad language, i never speak english in my normal life so I am a bit rusty ^^
Cheers
d!
Also over/under-voltage (which can reduce/drain battery) can be configured by kernel-config application (from kernel-power-settings package). Try to use other kernel-config profiles, maybe it solve this problem.
Somebody else also see high battery draining after upgrading from v48 to v49?
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to pali For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2012-02-01
, 11:05
|
|
Posts: 244 |
Thanked: 354 times |
Joined on Jul 2010
@ Scotland
|
#2686
|
Originally Posted by thedarkus
This probably won't translate well, but BatteryPatch hums baws.
- First is the concurrency of the Battery patch installation with the latest version of PK. It seems that many of us experienced heavy battery drain in standby mode (eg, during the night, no wifi, no bt, no widget, no data connection, 2g module locked), solved only after removing battery patch (reflashing the n900 without installing it again is the safest way to leave this first problem behind us)
Don't use it. Seriously - it's worthless, pointless, festering crap.
(Note - you're going to get this a lot on this thread).
| The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to gregoranderson For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2012-02-01
, 11:06
|
|
Posts: 1,680 |
Thanked: 3,685 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
|
#2687
|
I can assume as English is not your first language that you probably do not read these forums so much. So I will make this simple. Battery patch is not supported by the KP development team. If you have an issue running KP49+battery patch you must raise it with the creator of battery patch in the battery patch thread.
Almost all people here have no problems with KP49. All people who do not have problems also do not use battery patch. The suggestion being, don't use battery patch until it's creator can solve the conflict with KP49.
To aid in the diagnosis of your battery issues, use top, powertop etc.
Almost all people here have no problems with KP49. All people who do not have problems also do not use battery patch. The suggestion being, don't use battery patch until it's creator can solve the conflict with KP49.
To aid in the diagnosis of your battery issues, use top, powertop etc.
__________________
N900: One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.
| The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to vi_ For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2012-02-01
, 11:11
|
|
Posts: 1,680 |
Thanked: 3,685 times |
Joined on Jan 2011
|
#2688
|
Originally Posted by gregoranderson
lol@hums baws.
This probably won't translate well, but BatteryPatch hums baws.
Don't use it. Seriously - it's worthless, pointless, festering crap.
(Note - you're going to get this a lot on this thread).
gi-non yersell big man!
__________________
N900: One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.
| The Following User Says Thank You to vi_ For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2012-02-01
, 11:22
|
|
Posts: 81 |
Thanked: 22 times |
Joined on Mar 2011
|
#2689
|
Ok guys, thank you for your replies.
Yes, my english sucks so often i miss something reading 3ds.
I know battery patch is not developed by Pali, it was my just 2 cents about it.
In reply to Pali, i'm already using a not default profile, to undervolt my phone. I'm currently running an ULV profile without no stability issues. I did different test using the phone at 600, 720, 805 and 850 MHz too, with no significative differences in battery drain. Is still higher than with the stock kernel.
I also reflashed my phone, to have a fresh and clean installation for the PK, but the problem are still unsolved.
The thing that, more than other, sound me weird, is the time needed to charge the battery: 2hrs, sometimes less too, when with the default kernel is longer, almost 3 hrs or more. Obviously, i tested a second battery too, with the same results.
In addition, i daily use Cony to monitor process in background, there is not something wrong running in background. It just seems that my battery is recognized with less capacity than usual.
No one of you noticed the same problem?
d!
Yes, my english sucks so often i miss something reading 3ds.
I know battery patch is not developed by Pali, it was my just 2 cents about it.
In reply to Pali, i'm already using a not default profile, to undervolt my phone. I'm currently running an ULV profile without no stability issues. I did different test using the phone at 600, 720, 805 and 850 MHz too, with no significative differences in battery drain. Is still higher than with the stock kernel.
I also reflashed my phone, to have a fresh and clean installation for the PK, but the problem are still unsolved.
The thing that, more than other, sound me weird, is the time needed to charge the battery: 2hrs, sometimes less too, when with the default kernel is longer, almost 3 hrs or more. Obviously, i tested a second battery too, with the same results.
In addition, i daily use Cony to monitor process in background, there is not something wrong running in background. It just seems that my battery is recognized with less capacity than usual.
No one of you noticed the same problem?
d!
| The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to thedarkus For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2012-02-01
, 12:23
|
|
Posts: 1,583 |
Thanked: 1,203 times |
Joined on Dec 2011
@ Everywhere
|
#2690
|
my browser begin to reload all the time, random reboot, etc, after install this kernel, lol
but nice job indeed, long live maemo,
but nice job indeed, long live maemo,
__________________
~$
~#
~$
~#
 |
| Tags |
| battery-status, bq27x00_battery, kernel, kernel-power, misiak4king, noobs-cant-read, pali4president, patches, readdirections, revolverspinyou |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 15:39.