Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1.    #1  
    Anyone know the reason that I can get decent battery life using the old 800mhz (installed with QI) but get absolutely horrible life using uberkernal and the govnah set on fulltime 800mhz?

    My battery dropped from 80% to 35% in 2 1/2 hours with absolutely no use (it sat on my desk with screen turned off the entire time)

    If I set the govnah to palm default the battery life is fine. If I set the govnah to screenstate I get horrible (same as full time 800) battery life as well.

    Is it because I uninstalled the old 800mhz kernal but didn't doctor the phone before installing the uberkernal?
  2. #2  
    <<Thread Moved>>
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
  3.    #3  
    does the person who made this patch know what they are doing?
  4. #4  
    Sprint|Samsung Epic
  5. #5  
    Battery life for me has been more or less the same. Screenstate is the only profile I've used where battery life has been significantly worse. I'm currently using Fixed Speed 800 and battery life has been about the same prior to overclocking.

    And yes, the people who made UberKernel know exactly what they're doing.
  6. djmcgee's Avatar
    Posts
    626 Posts
    Global Posts
    627 Global Posts
    #6  
    I have noticed screenstate to be rather hard on my battery.

    Maybe the OP would like to try his hand at kernel modifications. Be thankful that 800 MHz is available - I know I am.
    Dan
  7. ahitz's Avatar
    Posts
    412 Posts
    Global Posts
    418 Global Posts
    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by omahawildcat View Post
    does the person who made this patch know what they are doing?
    Does the person who installed the kernel?

    Sorry, but asking if webOS-internals knows what they are doing is funny.

    WHICH 800MHz kernel did you previously have, remove with WOSQI, and not doctor after? Hopefully it did not have the initials SPK..
  8.    #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by ahitz View Post
    Does the person who installed the kernel?

    Sorry, but asking if webOS-internals knows what they are doing is funny.

    WHICH 800MHz kernel did you previously have, remove with WOSQI, and not doctor after? Hopefully it did not have the initials SPK..
    It was the 800MHzOS14.sh
    When I had that installed battery life was fine

    Thought I would get better life with the uberkernal running screen state. I thought wrong. I get battery life that is completely unacceptable.
  9.    #9  
    [QUOTE
    And yes, the people who made UberKernel know exactly what they're doing.[/QUOTE]

    I know, but saying that was the only way I received a response. So it worked.
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by omahawildcat View Post
    It was the 800MHzOS14.sh
    When I had that installed battery life was fine

    Thought I would get better life with the uberkernal running screen state. I thought wrong. I get battery life that is completely unacceptable.
    If you installed the UberKernel with out doctoring to remove all remnants of the OC kernal you had, then that might be the problem. Most people using the UK aren't experiencing the poor battery life that you are.
    "Patience, use the force, think." Obi-Wan


    Ready to try Preware? Get this first: Preware Homebrew Documentation
  11. ahitz's Avatar
    Posts
    412 Posts
    Global Posts
    418 Global Posts
    #11  
    Keep an eye on the the end of that thread linked earlier. There may be some weirdness going on with battery, maybe not, although it sounds different that what you're experiencing.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by omahawildcat View Post
    does the person who made this patch know what they are doing?
    Attitude noted.

    -- Rod
  13. #13  
    Rod, despite of the attitude...

    i started with the uberkernel shell script, too and experienced a huge battery improvement (http://forums.precentral.net/palm-pr...mhz-patch.html)

    I never got a battery drain this good with any newer kernels. Of course it could be that i added battery hungry services after my first overclock kernel (RSS feeds, new email accounts, ssh daemon, etc) - i never checked that in detail.

    With the first overclock kernel i was down to 1.5% per hour, now i'm usually around 2-2.5% when idling.

    Just saying...
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by WalterH View Post
    i started with the uberkernel shell script, too and experienced a huge battery improvement (http://forums.precentral.net/palm-pr...mhz-patch.html)
    There is no such thing as an UberKernel shell script. I suspect you're referring to a webOS 1.4.0 kernel from Marco, packaged against his wishes by another person not associated with WebOS Internals.

    I never got a battery drain this good with any newer kernels. Of course it could be that i added battery hungry services after my first overclock kernel (RSS feeds, new email accounts, ssh daemon, etc) - i never checked that in detail.

    With the first overclock kernel i was down to 1.5% per hour, now i'm usually around 2-2.5% when idling.
    Please do a comparative test, with the same background services, patches and webOS version running, and using the Fixed Speed 800 setting in UberKernel.

    Since the frequencies, voltages and governors are exactly the same for all 800MHz kernel code ever released except for WartHog, I expect you will get an identical result when you apply the same test conditions to both.

    If not, then I'll be pleased to review your detailed, repeatable, controlled testing conditions.

    -- Rod
    WebOS Internals and Preware Founder and Developer
    You may wish to donate by Paypal to donations @ webos-internals.org if you find our work useful.
    All donations go back into development.
    www.webos-internals.org twitter.com/webosinternals facebook.com/webosinternals
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by rwhitby View Post
    There is no such thing as an UberKernel shell script. I suspect you're referring to a webOS 1.4.0 kernel from Marco, packaged against his wishes by another person not associated with WebOS Internals.
    Yes, i'm referring to that package. And yes, believe me, i read the whole story about these packages. I'm right in that it came as a shellscript and you're right in that it wasn't supported by WebOS Internals at that point and that the first uberkernel was announced later and without that "person" you're referring to. Peace?

    Please do a comparative test, with the same background services, patches and webOS version running, and using the Fixed Speed 800 setting in UberKernel.
    Can't do that, sorry. My Pre is my only mobile phone and i simply need it to work (i run a small it security company) because i have SLAs to fulfil.

    I totally unterstand that you want hard numbers.

    Since the frequencies, voltages and governors are exactly the same for all 800MHz kernel code ever released except for WartHog, I expect you will get an identical result when you apply the same test conditions to both.
    That is to be expected then. I compiled a few Linux kernels in the past 15 years, too. The first one was a 0.95

    Unfortunately i have no idea what the conditions on my Pre looked like with webOS version 1.4.0. It's been a few months since then.
    Last edited by bevcraw; 08/05/2010 at 09:10 PM. Reason: keeping on topic
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by WalterH View Post
    Yes, i'm referring to that package. And yes, believe me, i read the whole story about these packages. I'm right in that it came as a shellscript and you're right in that it wasn't supported by WebOS Internals at that point and that the first uberkernel was announced later and without that "person" you're referring to. Peace?


    Can't do that, sorry. My Pre is my only mobile phone and i simply need it to work (i run a small it security company) because i have SLAs to fulfil.

    I totally unterstand that you want hard numbers.

    That is to be expected then. I compiled a few Linux kernels in the past 15 years, too. The first one was a 0.95

    Unfortunately i have no idea what the conditions on my Pre looked like with webOS version 1.4.0. It's been a few months since then.

    You posted an experience report comparing the operation of a "uberkernel shell script" against the latest UberKernel, and gave hard figures about comparative battery performance. People will read this thread and assume what you are saying is correct.

    I asked for clarification of what the former kernel you are referring to was, and then asked for details of the testing conditions and a controlled test. Seemed like a reasonable request to me. If you're not able to do that, then there's no issue.

    The testing and measurement of kernel performance is fuzzy and unreliable enough as it is. A thread entitled "battery life with uberkernel" should be expected to contribute to hard facts and reliable figures ...

    -- Rod
    Last edited by bevcraw; 08/05/2010 at 09:12 PM. Reason: original post edited
    WebOS Internals and Preware Founder and Developer
    You may wish to donate by Paypal to donations @ webos-internals.org if you find our work useful.
    All donations go back into development.
    www.webos-internals.org twitter.com/webosinternals facebook.com/webosinternals

Posting Permissions