7 ms·

Android 16 no longer provides device trees for Pixels as part of the Android Open Source Project. It's important to note it doesn't provide those for any other

by strcat 1y ago

Android 16 no longer provides device trees for Pixels as part of the Android Open Source Project. It's important to note it doesn't provide those for any other devices. There are no other OEMs providing similar AOSP support. A few OEMs publish more basic device trees for older Android versions. This was Pixels losing one of their advantages compared to non-Pixels but it was never one of our hardware requirements, which are listed at https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices. It isn't part of why Pixels are the only devices meeting our requirements. We're working with a major Android OEM to change that though, hopefully for 2026 or at least 2027. GrapheneOS typically ports to new yearly Android releases in a couple days and tends to have it reach the Stable channel in under 2 weeks. We completed our initial port to Android 16 in a similar time period after the release on 2025-06-10. However, we then had to reimplement device support in a similar way to how we would support a non-Pixel device. Our initial production release based on Android 16 was published on June 30th. As usual, we had to spend around a week making a series of releases fixing regressions reported by users. It reached our Stable channel on July 8th. Since our port to Android 16 took significantly longer than usual, we backported most of the Android 16 firmware, all of the kernel drivers and parts of the userspace device support to our now obsolete Android 15 QPR2 branch and did a few more releases based on Android 15 QPR2 where we were able to provide the full 2025-06-05 patch level which also turned out to be the full 2025-07-05 patch level due to no vulnerability fixes in the July 2025 Android Security Bulletin or Pixel Update Bulletin. This was an unusual approach and not generally a reasonable way of doing things. We were able to do it successfully. It won't be nearly as much of an issue going forward since we dealt with building the new automation we needed. Our port to Android 16 QPR1, Android 16 QPR2, Android 16 QPR3, Android 17, etc. shouldn't be nearly as difficult and we should get back to our typical porting time for major releases.

minimalist 1y ago
I suppose this means that supporting future Pixel devices will be more difficult? If someone has the ear of anyone at Google, especially someone who works with Android, please share this cause with them!
- poisonborz 1y ago
  The comment above was describing in great detail how this is not the case and after some initial effort should prove no difference at all.
- fifteen1506 1y ago
  Generic power-user here: I am going to guess without the backing of Google going forcefully open-source, "niche" hardware such as Google's Tensor will lose their attractiveness. However one must note also that for now not even Snapdragon fulfills GOS requirements. If/when that changes, Snapdragon devices may have more open-source community momentum than Google's Tensor. Plus all the economy of scale, etc.. In terms of security, Microtek is even more far behind Snapdragon. Again, not an Android dev here, take the text above with a grain of salt, YMMV, etc..
71bw 1y ago
Is it now possible to build a custom release of graphene for any of my non-Pixel devices or will that, again, bring graphene ninjas to my abode?
notachatbot123 1y ago
> We're working with a major Android OEM to change that though, hopefully for 2026 or at least 2027. Is there any chance that you fabulous guys could lobby for a smaller <5 inch phone with that OEM? (reference https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44586723 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44586723)
- backscratches 1y ago
  Seconded! Need a smaller phone! and video out means i can make screen biggger if i want!
- LMYahooTFY 1y ago
  The Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact was the perfect size phone and I hate the world for not having successors of the same size.
  - johnisgood 1y ago
    The phone I am currently using has the following dimensions: 165.2 x 75.7 x 9.1 mm (6.50 x 2.98 x 0.36 in). I think it is a sweet spot for me. I would not go for larger than this.
  - raffael_de 1y ago
    It is so annoying that all current smartphones are so large and heavy. The XZ1 Compact could be even smaller now considering the large case frame around the display. That would be amazing.
- preisschild 1y ago
  Do you guys all have that small pockets? I have a 6.7" Smartphone and never had an issue with its size
  - DanHulton 1y ago
    Oh it's not pockets. I just have tiny raccoon paws for hands. I like being able to reach across the keyboard one-handed (to shift, etc) and I can't do that on modern, larger phones.
wishfish 1y ago
As you're working with the OEM, I hope you'll consider a model which will come with either an IPS screen or is compatible with a 3rd party IPS replacement. I bought a Pixel 9 Pro Xl specifically to use with GrapheneOS. Unfortunately, its OLED and my eyes were incompatible. The PWM on the screen was terrible and I had to return it after some headaches. Of course, none of that was the fault of GrapheneOS. I absolutely loved using it and think your project is vital.
- backscratches 1y ago
  Agreed, pixel oled (and iphone oled) make my eyes blurry and achy and ia ssume its the pwm. ips laptop, other phones never have this effect
- preisschild 1y ago
  for me a non-OLED screen would be a non starter. I love reading text (white text with black background) and watching HDR videos on OLED screens
- spankibalt 1y ago
  > "As you're working with the OEM, I hope you'll consider a model which will come with either an IPS screen or is compatible with a 3rd party IPS replacement." Ahaha, don't get your hopes up, friend. The possibility of an adequate, degoogled Android with picky requirements as GOS on good, ultramobile hardware (matte DCI-P3 IPS, 3.5 mm audio, USB-C 3.2 or better, dedicated, ideally quick-access mSD card slot, IP68 rating, good cameras, EMR pen compatibility, changeable battery, non-plastic case) is virtually nil. That would essentially be a modern hybrid between a Samsung XCover Pro 6 and one of the older Samsung Note phones, e. g. the Note 9. Days long gone... :(
ranguna 1y ago
Quite a lot of detail on this comment, thanks for that! But I'm still left a bit confused about the future devices GraphaneOS will support: Because you said discussion are being done with an OEM, will GraphaneOS switch from pixels to a different device? You also said that not having the device tree won't be a major hurdle in building GraphaneOS for the future, does that mean we can expect the pixel 10 to have GraphaneOS or it's too early to know ? Thanks again!
- mbananasynergy 1y ago
  Pixel 10 will be supported by GrapheneOS provided it continues to meet our requirements - we'll know when it's out. It'll definitely take us longer than it has before. A collaboration with an OEM doesn't mean we'll stop providing existing or future Pixels if they continue to meet our requirements.
  - ranguna 1y ago
    Good to know. Thank you and good luck!
- strcat 1y ago
  > Because you said discussion are being done with an OEM, will GraphaneOS switch from pixels to a different device? Pixels will be supported until end-of-life. Future Pixels will be supported if they continue meeting our requirements. > You also said that not having the device tree won't be a major hurdle in building GraphaneOS for the future, does that mean we can expect the pixel 10 to have GraphaneOS or it's too early to know ? We expect 10th gen Pixels to meet our requirements and we should be able to add support for them. It's not going to happen in 12 to 48 hours from the official launch of the devices as we did for around the Pixel 6a and later. It will be more work. We've automated most of the device support for existing Pixels now and have removed nearly all of the Android 15 QPR2 device trees rather than manually updating them. We're continuing to automate more and will use that approach for supporting new Pixels. The devices with an OEM partner are further in the future than the Pixel 10. We need Qualcomm's new SoC with hardware memory tagging support to launch because a flagship Snapdragon is the best fit other than the current lack of hardware memory tagging. Some things need to be addressed by the OEM including licensing extra things like Qualcomm and filling in some missing features. There needs to be a clear, workable plan for updates including Linux kernel LTS branches.
ulrikrasmussen 1y ago
I am so excited about the thought of a GrapheneOS native phone!

by strcat 1y ago

minimalist 1y ago

I suppose this means that supporting future Pixel devices will be more difficult? If someone has the ear of anyone at Google, especially someone who works with Android, please share this cause with them!

poisonborz 1y ago
The comment above was describing in great detail how this is not the case and after some initial effort should prove no difference at all.
fifteen1506 1y ago
Generic power-user here: I am going to guess without the backing of Google going forcefully open-source, "niche" hardware such as Google's Tensor will lose their attractiveness. However one must note also that for now not even Snapdragon fulfills GOS requirements. If/when that changes, Snapdragon devices may have more open-source community momentum than Google's Tensor. Plus all the economy of scale, etc.. In terms of security, Microtek is even more far behind Snapdragon. Again, not an Android dev here, take the text above with a grain of salt, YMMV, etc..

71bw 1y ago

Is it now possible to build a custom release of graphene for any of my non-Pixel devices or will that, again, bring graphene ninjas to my abode?

notachatbot123 1y ago

> We're working with a major Android OEM to change that though, hopefully for 2026 or at least 2027. Is there any chance that you fabulous guys could lobby for a smaller <5 inch phone with that OEM? (reference https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44586723 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44586723)

backscratches 1y ago
Seconded! Need a smaller phone! and video out means i can make screen biggger if i want!
LMYahooTFY 1y ago
The Sony Xperia XZ1 Compact was the perfect size phone and I hate the world for not having successors of the same size.
- johnisgood 1y ago
  The phone I am currently using has the following dimensions: 165.2 x 75.7 x 9.1 mm (6.50 x 2.98 x 0.36 in). I think it is a sweet spot for me. I would not go for larger than this.
- raffael_de 1y ago
  It is so annoying that all current smartphones are so large and heavy. The XZ1 Compact could be even smaller now considering the large case frame around the display. That would be amazing.
preisschild 1y ago
Do you guys all have that small pockets? I have a 6.7" Smartphone and never had an issue with its size
- DanHulton 1y ago
  Oh it's not pockets. I just have tiny raccoon paws for hands. I like being able to reach across the keyboard one-handed (to shift, etc) and I can't do that on modern, larger phones.

wishfish 1y ago

As you're working with the OEM, I hope you'll consider a model which will come with either an IPS screen or is compatible with a 3rd party IPS replacement. I bought a Pixel 9 Pro Xl specifically to use with GrapheneOS. Unfortunately, its OLED and my eyes were incompatible. The PWM on the screen was terrible and I had to return it after some headaches. Of course, none of that was the fault of GrapheneOS. I absolutely loved using it and think your project is vital.

backscratches 1y ago
Agreed, pixel oled (and iphone oled) make my eyes blurry and achy and ia ssume its the pwm. ips laptop, other phones never have this effect
preisschild 1y ago
for me a non-OLED screen would be a non starter. I love reading text (white text with black background) and watching HDR videos on OLED screens
spankibalt 1y ago
> "As you're working with the OEM, I hope you'll consider a model which will come with either an IPS screen or is compatible with a 3rd party IPS replacement." Ahaha, don't get your hopes up, friend. The possibility of an adequate, degoogled Android with picky requirements as GOS on good, ultramobile hardware (matte DCI-P3 IPS, 3.5 mm audio, USB-C 3.2 or better, dedicated, ideally quick-access mSD card slot, IP68 rating, good cameras, EMR pen compatibility, changeable battery, non-plastic case) is virtually nil. That would essentially be a modern hybrid between a Samsung XCover Pro 6 and one of the older Samsung Note phones, e. g. the Note 9. Days long gone... :(

ranguna 1y ago

Quite a lot of detail on this comment, thanks for that! But I'm still left a bit confused about the future devices GraphaneOS will support: Because you said discussion are being done with an OEM, will GraphaneOS switch from pixels to a different device? You also said that not having the device tree won't be a major hurdle in building GraphaneOS for the future, does that mean we can expect the pixel 10 to have GraphaneOS or it's too early to know ? Thanks again!

mbananasynergy 1y ago
Pixel 10 will be supported by GrapheneOS provided it continues to meet our requirements - we'll know when it's out. It'll definitely take us longer than it has before. A collaboration with an OEM doesn't mean we'll stop providing existing or future Pixels if they continue to meet our requirements.
- ranguna 1y ago
  Good to know. Thank you and good luck!
strcat 1y ago
> Because you said discussion are being done with an OEM, will GraphaneOS switch from pixels to a different device? Pixels will be supported until end-of-life. Future Pixels will be supported if they continue meeting our requirements. > You also said that not having the device tree won't be a major hurdle in building GraphaneOS for the future, does that mean we can expect the pixel 10 to have GraphaneOS or it's too early to know ? We expect 10th gen Pixels to meet our requirements and we should be able to add support for them. It's not going to happen in 12 to 48 hours from the official launch of the devices as we did for around the Pixel 6a and later. It will be more work. We've automated most of the device support for existing Pixels now and have removed nearly all of the Android 15 QPR2 device trees rather than manually updating them. We're continuing to automate more and will use that approach for supporting new Pixels. The devices with an OEM partner are further in the future than the Pixel 10. We need Qualcomm's new SoC with hardware memory tagging support to launch because a flagship Snapdragon is the best fit other than the current lack of hardware memory tagging. Some things need to be addressed by the OEM including licensing extra things like Qualcomm and filling in some missing features. There needs to be a clear, workable plan for updates including Linux kernel LTS branches.

ulrikrasmussen 1y ago

I am so excited about the thought of a GrapheneOS native phone!