Clover General discussion

[syscl]

r4145 removed obsolete KernelHaswellEPatch, actually this routine does nothing in Clover. KernelHaswellE  has also been removed in both config.plist and binaries patches section in GUI.

 

Now we have EnableExtCpuXCPM to enable all this unsupported CPUs support automatically.

 

 

 

syscl

r4145.zip

[Sherlocks]

I don't care, do whatever, this conversation is going nowhere. Instead of suggesting to make the patches better so they work since THEY ARE NEEDED TO BOOT. You are all arguing about whether they should be able to be turned off, for what purpose? If the patch is not performed you cannot boot, this only applies to specific CPUs, these CPUs should be detected, all the information to determine need is there. In my opinion adding a boolean key makes it actually worse user experience because people are going to turn it on when they don't need it and wonder why they can't boot, or not turn it on when they do need it. And the most qualified person to solve an issue is a developer, I've never seen any random person just come on here and be like if you search for this binary data and replace it with this then this will work. You need the set of skills of a developer to be able to debug something.

 

EDIT: And now you've gone and irritated me.

Sorry for your irritated.

I sent pm. Please check.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

나의 LG-F800S 의 Tapatalk에서 보냄

[Philip Petev]

Guys, you obviously have missed something in r4145. Clover builds fine, but building the clover-genconfig part fails.

 

 

================= Making all in partutil =================
    [XCODE] partutil
================= Making all in bdmesg =================
    [XCODE] bdmesg
================= Making all in clover-genconfig =================
    [XCODE] clover-genconfig
** INSTALL FAILED **


The following build commands failed:
    CompileC /Users/philip/src/edk2/Clover/CloverPackage/sym/build/clover-genconfig/clover-genconfig.build/Release/clover-genconfig.build/Objects-normal/x86_64/clover-genconfig.o clover-genconfig.c normal x86_64 c com.apple.compilers.llvm.clang.1_0.compiler
    CompileC /Users/philip/src/edk2/Clover/CloverPackage/sym/build/clover-genconfig/clover-genconfig.build/Release/clover-genconfig.build/Objects-normal/i386/clover-genconfig.o clover-genconfig.c normal i386 c com.apple.compilers.llvm.clang.1_0.compiler
(2 failures)
make[2]: *** [/users/philip/src/edk2/Clover/CloverPackage/sym/utils/clover-genconfig] Error 65
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make: *** [pkg] Error 2

[syscl]

@Philip Petev issue fix in r4146. 

 

syscl

[Funky frank]

Gsus X what's happening here? Please make clover perfect again! (And finally answer all my questions!)

[Guest ricoc90]

Maybe a stupid question, but how can I patch a plugin on the fly?

[Sherlocks]

Maybe a stupid question, but how can I patch a plugin on the fly?

Info patch? Just add your device id? Or kext patch?

 

나의 LG-F800S 의 Tapatalk에서 보냄

[Guest ricoc90]

Info patch? Just add your device id? Or kext patch?

 

나의 LG-F800S 의 Tapatalk에서 보냄

Kext patch: xxxxa.kext/Contents/PlugIns/xxxxb.kext

[Sherlocks]

Kext patch: xxxxa.kext/Contents/PlugIns/xxxxb.kext

 

it's same like other patch

example

name com.apple.driver.AirPort.Brcm4360

find you want

replace you want

matchos you want

 

if you want to correct info, go to PlugIns folder and open info that you want to patch kext. example

AirPortBrcm4360.kext, you can see Bundle identifier "com.apple.driver.AirPort.Brcm4360" <--- use.

[Guest ricoc90]

it's same like other patch

example

name com.apple.driver.AirPort.Brcm4360

find you want

replace you want

matchos you want

 

if you want to correct info, go to PlugIns folder and open info that you want to patch kext. example

AirPortBrcm4360.kext, you can see Bundle identifier "com.apple.driver.AirPort.Brcm4360" <--- use.

 

Ah, thanks! I did not know you could use the bundle identifier 

[MattsCreative]

I don't care, do whatever, this conversation is going nowhere. Instead of suggesting to make the patches better so they work since THEY ARE NEEDED TO BOOT. You are all arguing about whether they should be able to be turned off, for what purpose? If the patch is not performed you cannot boot, this only applies to specific CPUs, these CPUs should be detected, all the information to determine need is there. In my opinion adding a boolean key makes it actually worse user experience because people are going to turn it on when they don't need it and wonder why they can't boot, or not turn it on when they do need it. And the most qualified person to solve an issue is a developer, I've never seen any random person just come on here and be like if you search for this binary data and replace it with this then this will work. You need the set of skills of a developer to be able to debug something.

 

EDIT: And now you've gone and irritated me. 

bios not firmware but BIOS 

[oSxFr33k]

For a much easier way to see the Mac log, please use maclog(http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/319998-get-system-log-from-1012-much-much-easierby-just-a-simply-click/?hl=%2Bmaclog&do=findComment&comment=2346366)

 

syscl

Hello @apiant Haswell-E also has some issues: need add some patches manually. I will try to improve it once Celeron/Pentium on Skylake+ issue fixed .

 

 

@Sherlocks Thank you for detail information. You said KernelPM still need on you Pentium right? But you said you have patched MSR 0xE2 lock...On MSI H87M-G43(unlocked MSR 0xE2 manually), I never use KernelPM=True. I will made a new Clover for you to see if it works!

 

Edited: @apiant pointed out your MSR 0xE2 still locked(clear 15bit at boot), need KernelPM unconditionally in this case.

 

syscl

 

 

Thanks!

[PMheart]

Hi.

 

I propose to add a boolean under KernelAndKextPatches named KernelIvyXCPM. It helps those who have Ivy Bridge CPU to enable XCPM without manual patches. The patches were made based on Clover r4153.

Thanks to Pike R. Alpha, theracermaster, syscl and some other great guys who helped me develop this new function.

 

ivy_xcpm_ok_4153.zip

 

Thank you!

 

EDIT: I saw @Sherlocks added it. Really appreciated, thanks @Sherlocks!

[Riley Freeman]

Thanks. I didn't dig too deep into getting XCPM working on my laptop once AICPUPM worked fine. But now I have it working with a single config.plist entry

 

Well, it's working in 10.11.6, but not in 10.12.6 or 10.13 PB. Maybe I'm missing something else.

[MICKHAEL]

Hi.

 

I propose to add a boolean under KernelAndKextPatches named KernelIvyXCPM. It helps those who have Ivy Bridge CPU to enable XCPM without manual patches. The patches were made based on Clover r4153.

Thanks to Pike R. Alpha, theracermaster, syscl and some other great guys who helped me develop this new function.

 

ivy_xcpm_ok_4153.zip

 

Thank you!

 

EDIT: I saw @Sherlocks added it. Really appreciated, thanks @Sherlocks!

 

hello. how about something like that for Broadwell-E?)

[Sherlocks]

hello. how about something like that for Broadwell-E?)

BroadwellE cpu has to check each patches on your system.

Because it has low frequency issue and high performance.

 

 

나의 LG-F800S 의 Tapatalk에서 보냄

[apianti]

bios not firmware but BIOS 

 

What?

For IBM PC compatible computers, BIOS (/ˈbaɪ.ɒs/ BYOS, an acronym for Basic Input/Output System and also known as the System BIOS, ROM BIOS or PC BIOS) is non-volatile firmware used to perform hardware initialization during the booting process (power-on startup), and to provide runtime services for operating systems and programs

[PMheart]

hello. how about something like that for Broadwell-E?)

Hello,

I think there's been already such patches, not very perfect though...

https://sourceforge.net/p/cloverefiboot/code/4154/tree//rEFIt_UEFI/Platform/kernel_patcher.c#l1032

Thanks. I didn't dig too deep into getting XCPM working on my laptop once AICPUPM worked fine. But now I have it working with a single config.plist entry

 

Well, it's working in 10.11.6, but not in 10.12.6 or 10.13 PB. Maybe I'm missing something else.

What happened with 10.12+? May be an instant reboot I guess?

[apianti]

@sherlocks, PMheart,

 

I think - just focusing too much on a boolean to turn something on or off that is needed to boot. But you are forgetting, either the patch is successful and boot. Or the patch fails, because it doesn't happen, and no boot or the user can still patch using the more advanced kernel/kext patching. What is the purpose of turning it on or off? Turn it off to do your own exact same patch? I guess I just don't see the point. Look at the current problem relating to KernelPm, it's pretty easy to detect and the setting just causes confusion since it has three options, on/off/detect but clover configurator only has a checkbox and writes out =true/false; detection happens when the key is absent.

[PMheart]

@sherlocks, PMheart,

 

I think - just focusing too much on a boolean to turn something on or off that is needed to boot. But you are forgetting, either the patch is successful and boot. Or the patch fails, because it doesn't happen, and no boot or the user can still patch using the more advanced kernel/kext patching. What is the purpose of turning it on or off? Turn it off to do your own exact same patch? I guess I just don't see the point. Look at the current problem relating to KernelPm, it's pretty easy to detect and the setting just causes confusion since it has three options, on/off/detect but clover configurator only has a checkbox and writes out =true/false; detection happens when the key is absent.

Hi, well, as for XCPM on Ivy Bridge, I think it's just users' choices to use XCPM or AICPUPM. So I guess a boolean could let user determine the primary power management mechanism. (If KernelIvyXCPM = TRUE then XCPM, otherwise AICPUPM.)

[mhaeuser]

@sherlocks, PMheart,

 

I think - just focusing too much on a boolean to turn something on or off that is needed to boot. But you are forgetting, either the patch is successful and boot. Or the patch fails, because it doesn't happen, and no boot or the user can still patch using the more advanced kernel/kext patching. What is the purpose of turning it on or off? Turn it off to do your own exact same patch? I guess I just don't see the point. Look at the current problem relating to KernelPm, it's pretty easy to detect and the setting just causes confusion since it has three options, on/off/detect but clover configurator only has a checkbox and writes out =true/false; detection happens when the key is absent.

 

Agreeing with you, though choice is never bad. Maybe it's the right time to discover the endless power of PCDs?

[apianti]

Hi, well, as for XCPM on Ivy Bridge, I think it's just users' choices to use XCPM or AICPUPM. So I guess a boolean could let user determine the primary power management mechanism. (If KernelIvyXCPM = TRUE then XCPM, otherwise AICPUPM.)

 

That's an entirely different thing all together. That's giving other CPUs that can boot without this patch, the ability to have this patch. This means that the only setting that would matter is KernelIvyXCPM=true, or it uses detection.... I didn't look at your patch but is that what it does or does setting KernelIvyXCPM=false turn off this patch altogether?

 

 

Agreeing with you, though choice is never bad. Maybe it's the right time to discover the endless power of PCDs?

 

Oh god, it's beyond that at this point. Plus just another level of complexity gasoline you're throwing into a wildfire. lol

[PMheart]

That's an entirely different thing all together. That's giving other CPUs that can boot without this patch, the ability to have this patch. This means that the only setting that would matter is KernelIvyXCPM=true, or it uses detection.... I didn't look at your patch but is that what it does or does setting KernelIvyXCPM=false turn off this patch altogether?

Yes. So we should definitely give users ability to choose.

 

Some reasons to let it return false:

1. Unsupported macOS (< 10.8.5, because there was just no XCPM, or > 10.14, how can that be for now lol)

2. CPU is not Ivy Bridge.

3. KernelIvyXCPM = false in config.plist (Users may want to enjoy the good old AICPUPM)

 

How could we even make a detection when both ways are ok?

Edited August 9, 2017 by PMheart

[MattsCreative]

What?

For IBM PC compatible computers, BIOS (/ˈbaɪ.ɒs/ BYOS, an acronym for Basic Input/Output System and also known as the System BIOS, ROM BIOS or PC BIOS) is non-volatile firmware used to perform hardware initialization during the booting process (power-on startup), and to provide runtime services for operating systems and programs

was just messing how are you and clover v3 I can’t wait

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Riley Freeman]

What happened with 10.12+? May be an instant reboot I guess?

 

No reboot, but running sysctl machdep reported xcpm.mode as 0. In 10.11.6 it reports as 1 and shows the correct values for the min and max states (0 again in 10.12+).