mhaeuser Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 18 hours ago, naiclub said: And there is another question circled in yellow on the right. If we add an order to cancel OC, do you think you can do it? This is not possible with OC's design, and it's broken for most other solutions at least to some extent. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naiclub Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 Just now, Download-Fritz said: This is not possible with OC's design, and it's broken for most other solutions at least to some extent. It is very unfortunate. Then I have to choose one or the other. For me, I think that Clover works very well It works very flexible. OCs are very fragile. If the solution is not compatible with this system, it is a very big issue. Either way, I will support both systems. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miliuco Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 TpmInfo.efi There is a new tool called TpmInfo.efi to check if the hardware is TPM 2 capable. It does not say if TPM is enabled or disabled, it only says if the hardware supports it. Executed from the picker, the output text is displayed for such a short time that it is impossible to read what it says. Executed from UEFI Shell, it works fine. As @vit9696 says in the bug tracker, it must be run from UEFI Shell. Does anyone know what the last 2 lines "Discovered status of xxxxxxxx is not found" mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anto65 Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, miliuco said: TpmInfo.efi There is a new tool called TpmInfo.efi to check if the hardware is TPM 2 capable. It does not say if TPM is enabled or disabled, it only says if the hardware supports it. Executed from the picker, the output text is displayed for such a short time that it is impossible to read what it says. Executed from UEFI Shell, it works fine. As @vit9696 says in the bug tracker, it must be run from UEFI Shell. Does anyone know what the last 2 lines "Discovered status of xxxxxxxx is not found" mean? Yes tried this morning, I also wondered about the last 2 lines 🤔 Edited June 28, 2021 by antuneddu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miliuco Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 3 minutes ago, antuneddu said: Yes tried this morning, I also wondered about the last 2 lines 🤔 I see. It seems that we both are TPM 2 capable but I hope someone clarifies this question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anto65 Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 8 minutes ago, miliuco said: I see. It seems that we both are TPM 2 capable but I hope someone clarifies this question. it could refer to some TPM options, I'm not sure if in doubt I leave everything like this 😆 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eSaF Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 27 minutes ago, miliuco said: Does anyone know what the last 2 lines "Discovered status of xxxxxxxx is not found" mean? I suspect it means whether it is enabled or disabled!!!??? Can't think of any other than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavageAUS Posted June 28, 2021 Share Posted June 28, 2021 TpmInfo.efi There is a new tool called TpmInfo.efi to check if the hardware is TPM 2 capable. It does not say if TPM is enabled or disabled, it only says if the hardware supports it. Executed from the picker, the output text is displayed for such a short time that it is impossible to read what it says. Executed from UEFI Shell, it works fine. As [mention=1135927]vit9696[/mention] says in the bug tracker, it must be run from UEFI Shell. Does anyone know what the last 2 lines "Discovered status of xxxxxxxx is not found" mean?Try enable / disable tpm and see if the value changes?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vit9696 Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 They read some registers on Haswell-based laptop machines. You can ignore them. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LockDown Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 Hi @vit9696 Quick question mate. What is the minimum OS version for xchiportlimit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miliuco Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 15 minutes ago, ellaosx said: Hi @vit9696 Quick question mate. What is the minimum OS version for xchiportlimit? 10.11. Not required for older. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost8282 Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 (edited) Hi all, hi @vit9696 I noticed that I'm not able to boot the BaseSystem.img (converted dmg to img, dmg extracted from the InstallAssistant.pkg of Big Sur 11.4) in qemu, if SecureBootModel is Default (latest debug version of opencore at the time of writing and all your kexts updated). The virtualized environment contains only BaseSystem and an empty hd. As soon as I change SecureBootModel to Disabled it boots the BaseSystem installer without issues. SecureBootModel Default boots without issue the installer created from the create install media, it just bootloops with the BaseSystem. It boots to opencanopy (opencanopy is forced to show), there's the BaseSystem entry, click on it, bootloop (nothing useful in the opencore debug log...) Is this a bug that needs to be opened in the bugtracker or am I missing something and I'm just an idiot ? update: finally I decided to open an issue in bugtracker, it does't sound as an expected behavior, sorry if I'm wrong Edited June 29, 2021 by ghost8282 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammoune78 Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 I've tried tpminfo.efi from shell and it does nothing, Mobo: GA-Z87X-UD3H. It does check for the module installed first, and then if 2.0 hardware capable, or only hardware capable with and without module to be installed?Sent from my Redmi Note 9S using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STLVNUB Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 (edited) Quick question and call me a dumb ass, but how do you make recovery HDD show in picker? Edited June 29, 2021 by STLVNUB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ammoune78 Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 (edited) 14 hours ago, STLVNUB said: Quick question how do you make recovery HDD show in picker? Then it's: Misc=>Boot=>HideAuxiliary=No Edited June 30, 2021 by ammoune78 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STLVNUB Posted June 29, 2021 Share Posted June 29, 2021 (edited) 21 minutes ago, ammoune78 said: Misc=>Boot=>HideAuxiliary=No Misc=>Boot=>PickerAttributes=1 On previous OC builds 0.6 Misc=>Security=>ScanPolicy=0 Misc=>Security=>DmgLoading=Signed if I'm not mistaking Thanks Had HideAuxillary Yes Edited June 29, 2021 by STLVNUB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhaeuser Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 @ghost8282 If I understood you correctly, yes, it is expected. DMGs are signed as a whole, and you circumvent that with the conversion. DMGs cannot have machine-specific signatures for the boot files for obvious reasons, so they cannot properly support SB. Hence SB is disabled for booting validated images (follows Apple behaviour), which does not happen for you. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost8282 Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, Download-Fritz said: @ghost8282 If I understood you correctly, yes, it is expected. DMGs are signed as a whole, and you circumvent that with the conversion. DMGs cannot have machine-specific signatures for the boot files for obvious reasons, so they cannot properly support SB. Hence SB is disabled for booting validated images (follows Apple behaviour), which does not happen for you. Thank you very much, I understand now! Indeed, as also suggested, creating a second vdisk, formatted as FAT32, creating the folder com.apple.recovery.boot and copying both BaseSystem.dmg and BaseSystem.chunklist, allow me to boot the to the online installer with SecureBootModel=Default Thank you very much again for the detailed explanation. Edited June 30, 2021 by ghost8282 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavageAUS Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 What’s the option to stop windows identifying as a Mac?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1Revenger1 Posted June 30, 2021 Share Posted June 30, 2021 43 minutes ago, SavageAUS said: What’s the option to stop windows identifying as a Mac? PlatformInfo -> UpdateSMBIOSMode = Custom Kernel->Quirks-> CustomSMBIOSGUID = True Note that this relies on the CustomSMBIOSGUID patch working, so macOS may fail to boot if the patch doesn't work. That said, I've never seen it break so probably not a big worry. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlGrey Posted July 5, 2021 Share Posted July 5, 2021 Hi, I would like to see PatchProvideCurrentCpuInfo set cpuid_cores_per_package in XNU kernel. FIND : 44 89 EA C1 EA 1A REPLACE : ba [CpuInfo->CoreCount - 1] 00 00 00 90 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavageAUS Posted July 5, 2021 Share Posted July 5, 2021 Hi, I would like to see PatchProvideCurrentCpuInfo set cpuid_cores_per_package in XNU kernel. FIND : 44 89 EA C1 EA 1A REPLACE : ba [CpuInfo->CoreCount - 1] 00 00 00 90Is this a new patch for Monterey beta 1 or 2? Existing patch that needs changing?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlGrey Posted July 5, 2021 Share Posted July 5, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, SavageAUS said: Is this a new patch for Monterey beta 1 or 2? Existing patch that needs changing? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk New one that I would like to see implemented. Catalina and up: FIND : 44 89 EA mov edx, r13d C1 EA 1A shr edx, 0x1a REPLACE: BA [CpuInfo->CoreCount - 1] 00 00 00 mov edx,[CORE COUNT-1] 90 nop Mojave and down is EAX (Checked until 10.13) FIND: 44 89 E8 mov eax, r13d C1 E8 1A shr eax, 0x1a REPLACE: b8 [CpuInfo->CoreCount - 1] 00 00 00 mov eax,[CORE COUNT-1] 90 nop Edited July 5, 2021 by AlGrey 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1Revenger1 Posted July 5, 2021 Share Posted July 5, 2021 5 hours ago, Alpha999 said: If you want to use the most boot loaders in an easy way, I recommend that you consider using a chain loader. OpenCore isn't too bad to use, assuming the ACPI modifications you make are OS aware. I like being able to choose windows in the startup disk preference pane, as well as in the boot camp tool within windows. I boot windows through OC on my X1 Extreme and my AMD desktop without issue. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryV Posted July 5, 2021 Share Posted July 5, 2021 3 hours ago, 1Revenger1 said: OpenCore isn't too bad to use, assuming the ACPI modifications you make are OS aware. I like being able to choose windows in the startup disk preference pane, as well as in the boot camp tool within windows. I boot windows through OC on my X1 Extreme and my AMD desktop without issue. Chainloading windows with GRUB2 or Refind without issues. https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/346639-updated-tips-and-observations-for-big-sur-and-monterey-b2/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts