trx40 [Discussion] - TRX40 Bare Metal - Vanilla Patches

[Arrakis]

On 6/2/2021 at 3:04 PM, Allubz said:

Thanks to @Arrakis latest EFI, updated to 0.7.0, I can boot 11.4 just fine on the TRX40 Designare rev. 1.1.

 

I have the same problem with the  Intel I210 NICs, unsurprisingly. I've had similar lockups (when the NIC should receive an address) on modern Realtek chips. In the end setting manual speed usually fixed it.

 

I set manual speeds for the NICs, but it won't help just like that. I'm looking at using FakePCIID + I225 kext, and then updating the device-id and PrimaryMatch.

 

UPDATE: Disregard crossed text. Take the I225.kext, update the IOPCIPrimaryMatch to 0x15338086 and you got working LAN and no KP.

 

Thing is, macOS interface became a bit "choppy" first time, but this seems fixed by defaulting the "Manual" configuration on the "Hardware" tab to "Automatically", which I had set before and it seems to be the only difference.

 

Maybe there's merit to updating the device-id as well, but I don't understand how to obtain it and edit it conform the info.plist format.

 

UPDATE 2 / question: How to troubleshoot onboard audio on TRX40, or specifically the Designare? I get Mattise USB2.0 audio devices, regardless of which analogue port I try, but no sound.

 

The IOPCIPrimaryMatch should be 0x15338086, I got that far.

 

I can't figure out how to obtain the right device-id, and translate it to the typical code the kext info.plist understands. The current entry is: 8hUAAA== which should resemble I225, what I'm looking for is obtaining our device-id, translating it to info.plist text, and testing this kext, as I think the controllers are close to identical and could fix our problem (besides reverting to 11.3.1).

 

Maybe someone can chime in on how to achieve this 🙂

@AllubzThanks 😀 

I confirm the Allubz solution for my problem of recognizing the I210 ethernet ports under Big Sur 11.4.

The current solution is to use the Kexts FakePCIID + I225 kext with the value: IOPCrimaryMatch at 0x15338086

The ports are functional and no panic kernels.

 

@fabiosun My efi to put in the OP, thank you.

 

Edited June 15, 2021 by fabiosun
Added EFi in OP

[fabiosun]

[iGPU]

Anche io!

 

[fabiosun]

Please @iGPU in English😂

[valmeida]

Things have been pretty quiet 🤫 in the forum since the release of Monterey.🧐🤔

[fabiosun]

😂

all is working fine

waiting for the maintainer  reach their goal to release new patches locations🥳

[iGPU]

fabiosun,

 

While waiting for Monterey patches, I decided to regress and try booting into Mojave as an exercise. But, I can't seem to get it to work. I've tried old settings that I thought worked a year or so ago, including OC v061 as well as v070 with its various updates.

 

In verbose mode, I only see  the following on screen and then computer freezes:

End SetConsoldeMode

Start OpenKernelRootVolume

End OpenKernelRootVolume

 

When looking at the debug error code, during the Mojave boot, the stoppage occurs at the XNU hook stage (shown in spoiler with comparison to same area during a successful boot into Big Sur). Once the XNU hook is successful, then the kernel patches are loaded, so this freeze occurs just before the Kernel Patch stage. 

 

Any ideas how to fix?

 

Spoiler

Mojave boot stops here:

 

same position during Big Sur boot:

 

 

[fabiosun]

Are you sure to have all Mojave kernel patches set?

if so maybe could it be your bignavi2 gpu?

then I see Mac OS 10.12?

 

Edited June 19, 2021 by fabiosun

[fabiosun]

I am trying also this exercise 🙂

 

[fabiosun]

With Catalina your exercise should be more simple about your usb problem

because Apple changed from catalina usb driver and from there it was more compatible with trx40 usb way

if you remember I have had many usb problems also in proxmox when I was using high Sierra 

 

about using new gpu I think it is an impossible mission.. but if you win.. I would like to try the os you dislike (catalina)

I think it is the best solution for our trx40 system😅

[Driftwood]

Hi chaps!

 

Has anyone else had bouncing ball on Davinci 17.2.1? (I know 17.2 is ok)

[fabiosun]

6 hours ago, Driftwood said:

Hi chaps!

 

Has anyone else had bouncing ball on Davinci 17.2.1? (I know 17.2 is ok)

No

it is working perfectly here

[Arrakis]

@Driftwood

 I also confirm Resolve 17.2.1 works without patch.

Edited June 23, 2021 by Arrakis

[Ploddles]

I've always read on here that you cannot run a Windows Virtual Machine on macOS on our Bare Metal Threadrippers.

 

As I was on day release from hospital today, I updated my machine to the latest OC release (0.7.0) and the latest BS Beta (11.5 beta 3). Whilst in hospital I had fixed a friends laptop that was continually crashing be wiping it and loading the latest Windows, Win10_21H1. As I had the ISO on a USB drive I decided to try a VM on the Threadripper, thinking it wouldn't work.

 

My copy of VM Fusion was very old, V6, so I downloaded the latest VirtualBox to play with. I know it isn't the best VM software but it is free.

 

It was with great surprise then that a Windows VM was up and running in a matter of minutes. No having to try and patch anything or anything else. I have always had SVM enabled in my BIOS setup so I didn't even have to change anything in there either.

 

So it works. I haven't tried passing through the RX 6900 XT or RX 6800 XT through to it yet, I was just astonished that it worked straight away.

 

 

[Jaidy]

6 hours ago, Ploddles said:

I've always read on here that you cannot run a Windows Virtual Machine on macOS on our Bare Metal Threadrippers.

 

As I was on day release from hospital today, I updated my machine to the latest OC release (0.7.0) and the latest BS Beta (11.5 beta 3). Whilst in hospital I had fixed a friends laptop that was continually crashing be wiping it and loading the latest Windows, Win10_21H1. As I had the ISO on a USB drive I decided to try a VM on the Threadripper, thinking it wouldn't work.

 

My copy of VM Fusion was very old, V6, so I downloaded the latest VirtualBox to play with. I know it isn't the best VM software but it is free.

 

It was with great surprise then that a Windows VM was up and running in a matter of minutes. No having to try and patch anything or anything else. I have always had SVM enabled in my BIOS setup so I didn't even have to change anything in there either.

 

So it works. I haven't tried passing through the RX 6900 XT or RX 6800 XT through to it yet, I was just astonished that it worked straight away.

 

 

glad you're back home! 

[fabiosun]

@Ploddlesthanks it is working fine also adding all cores 🙂

[Ploddles]

I only used the single core as an initial install to see if it would work. It is good that we now have another option to run a Windows program without rebooting.

 

I understand that Fusion Player 12 is free for home use so I will give that a try as well when I get the chance. I didn't realise at first that you can't pass through a graphics card, such as the RX6900XT, using VirtualBox as that option was removed a while back. I presume we still can with Fusion, and Parallels. Let's hope they work as well. The last time I used Fusion was about 6 years ago, and I have never used Parallels, so things will have changed a bit since then.

[fabiosun]

fusion player 12

I can't install any os..but I dont know what I am doing.. 😉

 

[Ploddles]

I get the same error using Fusion. It looks like VirtualBox is the only one that works on AMD cpus. 

[fabiosun]

@Ploddles

 

We are both using this patch, but it is not an official one I think

do you remember where it was taken from or have you taken it in the past from my config.plist?

I can't find it and strangely it works the same way as the official one ...

@iGPU and @Shaneee can you take a look when you have time too?

 

thank you very much

[fabiosun]

to be more clear , without that patch my system does not boot

it boots fine with this one (NoOne official one and it seems completely different from one I and @Ploddlesand maybe other people are using):

 

It would be useful to understand why 🙂

 

[Ploddles]

@fabiosun I can't remember exactly where it came from but I think it was needed mid way through the Catalina updates, probably about 10.15.3 or 10.15.4. I have enough trouble remembering my own name never mind something like this 🤪

 

My latest EFI (OC 0.7.0) for the Gigabyte Xtreme can be downloaded from HERE for you to update the OP.

[iGPU]

12 hours ago, fabiosun said:

to be more clear , without that patch my system does not boot

it boots fine with this one (NoOne official one and it seems completely different from one I and @Ploddlesand maybe other people are using):

 

It would be useful to understand why 🙂

 

 

I'm using both of these two, having them both enabled. I don't remember when/where it arose, but I do vaguely remember trying to minimize the number of patches and both were needed.

 

But the last time I checked any of these was maybe in August or September with an older BIOS and the current Big Sur at that time.

 

[fabiosun]

I am using this attached set of patches to boot with Big Sur, I think is possible also for all of you to boot and to have a perfect system as I have..Maybe, gigabyte users need also of CPU topology patch as @Arrakistested some time ago.

My question is different and above maybe I have explained in a not clearly way.

 

Official patch from AMD OSX github :

algrey - lapic_init - remove version check and panic - 10.13/10.14

find           25FC0000 0083F813 

replace    25F00000 00EB2390    

good for HighSierra and Mojave

 

NoOne - lapic_init - remove version check and panic - 10.16

find           83F8130F 86810000 00 

replace    90909090 90909090 90

good for Big Sur

 

patch I use:

lapic_init - remove version check and panic

find           25FC0000 0083F813 

replace    25FC0000 000F1F00 

good for Big Sur

 

so in my case same FIND of Mojave but different replace data to patch...

 

I and others two people of good will are trying to understand how to "discover" useful way to create own patches..

but it's hard to understand in my case because I have an AMD CPU only from latest Threadripper as you know..and this was only recently supported from Opencore Bootloader and its clone 🙂

I put in a spoiler the following thoughts (it is a personal opinion and maybe you could not like this):

Spoiler

the documentation found online is nothing short of "opaque" and those who hold the "holy grail" of knowledge or have withdrawn

from the scene are also very pissed off at those who are continuing their work, or, at best, not they have an interest in providing useful information for their own reasons.

In my opinion, this is against the spirit of Hackintosh ... It's just my thought but that's it!

If you like, share the config.plist you are using, I would like to try them on my system to understand how true there is also about some statements of a well-known guru

regarding the lack of support of opencore towards the CPUs of AMD (and these are not nice words for the kernel patches we use) 🙂

 

patches.plist.zip

1 hour ago, iGPU said:

 

I'm using both of these two, having them both enabled. I don't remember when/where it arose, but I do vaguely remember trying to minimize the number of patches and both were needed.

 

Yep the goal was also for me to minimise Patches's number

Curious why you have to use both on your system

When you have time and if you like I would like to try your patches combination

thank you

[fabiosun]

13 hours ago, Ploddles said:

@fabiosun I can't remember exactly where it came from but I think it was needed mid way through the Catalina updates, probably about 10.15.3 or 10.15.4. I have enough trouble remembering my own name never mind something like this 🤪

 

My latest EFI (OC 0.7.0) for the Gigabyte Xtreme can be downloaded from HERE for you to update the OP.

Done @Ploddles

could you try to disable patch 13 and see if your system boot fine the same in Big Sur (if you have a backup where you can boot again..just in the worst case) 🙂