Thanks but I do not have SmartReflex going. Oh well, just have to wait for new kernels.

actually you can use either ronaldo

i use the
flasher-3.5.exe -k zImage-900mhz -f -R
everytime i flash a kernel and it works fine mate :-)#

all it is , is command and its saying run the maemo flasher exe file basically execute maemo flasher

like i say i use it everytime and it works fine

guess some pc's may be different though

on my xp mode in win7x64 , it does not work if i include .exe.

cheers

with vista 32 bit it works fine with .exe this is obvously why it doesnt work with you and works with me

I installed now titan -maemo20 LV kernel, and got no dmesg warning anymore, and OC up to 1ghz, looks running stable so far, I am also keep the min frequency at 250mhz rather than 125 (I'll feel safer), I will run the phone for like a day or two, if no issue arise I'll try next the ULV kernel step.

Hey guys ran another battery test:

stock kernel vs. Lethos 125-800mhz kernel

the mp3 playback battle. Just mp3 playback, no wlan, no network (yeah i know its kinda experimental setup, but that was the purpose).

Check out the interesting results:

If you are a music lover and use your N900 as a mobile jukebox, i wouldn't advise using a 125-800mhz kernel. It will not stay in 125mhz during mp3 playback and consequently jump to high frequencies for split seconds resulting in an higher power consumption. The stock kernel handles this task better and gives you about an hour of extra music playback..


Its just my personal assumption, but i think the 125mhz step is neither useful for power saving nor a smooth experience. ULV 250mhz should be the way to go.

green: voltage
red: percent charge
purple: cpu load

TOP: stock kernel BOTTOM: 125-800mhz kernel by Letho

what are the best ways to revert to the original kernel?

apt-get install --reinstall kernel kernel-flasher

that doesnt work for me, it tells me that it can't download kernel or kernel-flasher

Currently i have the latest lv from titan.

The thing is that currently my sim card is not seen any more. Booting takes quite a long time (the second time that .... appears) and then without asking for the sim code it just boots the desktop with the no simcard inserted symbol.

I had this problem now and then before that i needed to reboot or even get the battery out and the sim card out. Then it would see my sim card again. This happened sometimes i ask this forum if more people had this but didnt get replies. But now i was busy getting various kernels. And suddenly i did see the no sim installed. So i rebooted, nothing, i get the battery and sim card out, still nothing. My sim card in another phone, works fine, my girlfriends sim in my N900 and also the same problem.
So it seems that that part really died now.. Can it be because of overclocking/under volting that i was busy with??

But now i want to completely revert to stock firmware to test this and go back to nokia if the problem persists.

titan got a question for you as i am using your lv kernel (great work m8), the following i am gona paste is not an error msg, but in analyze dmesg i was wondering about something:
[ 3.090026] Disabling unused clock "gpt2_ick"
[ 3.090087] Disabling unused clock "gpt3_ick"
[ 3.090148] Disabling unused clock "gpt4_ick"
[ 3.090179] Disabling unused clock "gpt5_ick"
[ 3.090209] Disabling unused clock "gpt6_ick"
[ 3.090240] Disabling unused clock "gpt7_ick"
[ 3.090270] Disabling unused clock "gpt8_ick"
[ 3.090301] Disabling unused clock "gpt9_ick"
[ 3.090362] Disabling unused clock "uart3_ick"
[ 3.090393] Disabling unused clock "gpio2_dbck"
[ 3.090423] Disabling unused clock "gpio3_dbck"
[ 3.090454] Disabling unused clock "gpio4_dbck"
[ 3.090484] Disabling unused clock "gpio5_dbck"
[ 3.090515] Disabling unused clock "gpio6_dbck"
[ 3.090576] Disabling unused clock "gpt9_fck"
[ 3.090606] Disabling unused clock "gpt8_fck"
[ 3.090637] Disabling unused clock "gpt7_fck"
[ 3.090667] Disabling unused clock "gpt6_fck"
[ 3.090698] Disabling unused clock "gpt5_fck"
[ 3.090728] Disabling unused clock "gpt4_fck"
[ 3.090759] Disabling unused clock "gpt3_fck"
[ 3.090820] Disabling unused clock "gpt2_fck"
[ 3.090850] Disabling unused clock "uart3_fck"
[ 3.090881] Disabling unused clock "wdt2_ick"
[ 3.090911] Disabling unused clock "wdt2_fck"
[ 3.090942] Disabling unused clock "gpio1_dbck"
[ 3.091003] Disabling unused clock "rng_ick"
[ 3.091033] Disabling unused clock "ssi_ick"
[ 3.091064] Disabling unused clock "gpt10_ick"
[ 3.091125] Disabling unused clock "gpt11_ick"
[ 3.091156] Disabling unused clock "uart1_ick"
[ 3.091186] Disabling unused clock "uart2_ick"
[ 3.091217] Disabling unused clock "usbtll_ick"
[ 3.091278] Disabling unused clock "ssi_ssr_fck"
[ 3.091308] Disabling unused clock "uart1_fck"
[ 3.091339] Disabling unused clock "uart2_fck"
[ 3.091400] Disabling unused clock "usbtll_fck"
[ 3.091461] Disabling unused clock "ts_fck"
[ 3.091491] Disabling unused clock "cpefuse_fck"
[ 3.091522] Disabling unused clock "gpt11_fck"
[ 3.091552] Disabling unused clock "gpt10_fck"
[ 3.091583] Disabling unused clock "dpll5_ck"
[ 3.091674] Disabling unused clock "dpll4_m6x2_ck"
[ 3.091705] Disabling unused clock "dpll4_m5x2_ck"
[ 3.091735] Disabling unused clock "dpll3_m3x2_ck"
[ 3.091796] Disabling unused clock "sys_clkout1"

what are these unused clock for? you disable them on purpose or they are modules which aren't used from kernel, in which in this second case they could just be stripped off to reduce the kernel size further no?

Why would any one use the n900 as a mobile jukebox ???

It tries to recalculate the new frequency basing on cpu frequency switching delay and current load. The goal is - have some available CPU resource after switch.

I know, it is not that we want for mobile and battery based N900 but we have no appropriate scaling governor yet.

EDIT: actually, it should be a cooperative work of kernel and high level software like mission-control and ohm.