IntelLucy for the Intel X500 family

[kgp]

@Mieze,

 

thanks for continuing this investigation! I’ve tested IntelLucy-1.1.313 and here’s a summary:

• DHCP at boot: inconsistent - NIC sometimes stays not connected, sometimes connects after minutes, sometimes starts toggling immediately and connects subsequently. IPv6 often detected, sometimes both IPv4/IPv6.
• IPv4/IPv6 Manual: NIC toggles until a stable link is established. Once green, addresses are applied correctly. Switching DHCP <-> Manual while PHY active is impossible; deactivating Ethernet-1 first allows manual addresses to persist after reactivating Ethernet-1.
• Hardware settings: can only set “Manual” while Ethernet-1 inactive. Activating Ethernet-1 resets Hardware to “Automatic”. Unlike IPv4/IPv6, Hardware settings do not persist.

 

Suggestion: Let's first stabilise Hardware settings (10GBase-T, Full-Duplex, MTU 9000) with IPv4/IPv6 Manual. This isolates PHY initialization and tests whether autonegotiation is the cause. Once Hardware is stable, DHCP vs Manual tests can follow. All tests for now under Sequoia 15.6.1. Tahoe as the last step. 

 

Request: please let me know if logging is possible, so we could see exactly how IntelLucy behaves with my X550-AT2 NICs on the ASUS X299 Sage 10G.

 

Best regards,

 

KGP 👍

Edited September 12, 2025 by KGP-iMacPro

[Mieze]

@KGP-iMacPro In order to get kernel logs you need to disable SIP completely and install the kext to /Library/Extensions/ because kexts injected with the boot loader don't produce any logging information. I use a separate installation of Monterey to get log data. Here are the required steps to set up logging for Monterey. Newer versions of macOS might be different. Attached you'll find a debug built of the kext, which generates additional debug messages. Use it to collect log data!

1. Boot to the corresponding recovery partition and use csrutil to disable SIP.
2. Boot back to the normal installation.
3. Fix the kext's permissions:

   sudo chown -R 0:0 IntelLucy.kext
   sudo chmod -R 755 IntelLucy.kext

4. Put the kext into /Library/Extensions/
5. Next you'll be prompted to allow loading of the kext. Go to System Preferences as requested and open the Privacy & Security panel. Unlock the settings in the plane with your password. Give permission to load the kext.
6. You'll be asked if the system should be rebooted. Click reboot.
7. Retrieve the log data in Terminal with the command:

   log show --predicate 'sender == "IntelLucy"'

Good luck testing!

 

Mieze 😺

IntelLucy-1.1.314-debug.zip

Edited September 12, 2025 by Mieze

[kgp]

@Mieze, thanks for providing the debug build. I set up Monterey with SIP fully disabled, installed the kext into /Library/Extensions/, fixed permissions and collected the logs. 

 

Unfortunately, the X550-AT2 NICs on my ASUS X299 Sage 10G never established a stable link with IntelLucy during the tests. The Ethernet-1 status in macOS kept permanently toggling between red and green (disconnected/connected) without ever holding a proper connection.

 

In order to switch the Ethernet settings from “Automatic” (DHCP, hardware) to manual (IPv4/IPv6, DNS, 10GBase-T, Full-Duplex, MTU 9000), I had to unplug the Ethernet cable as there is no "make inactive" -> "make active"option in the Ethernet settings of Monterey. Still, the NICs kept flapping and never stayed online.

 

I captured the debug logs during these attempts and attach them to this post for analysis. Please let me know what exactly you’d like me to reproduce or focus on in the next round of tests, if necessary. Please also let me know if you need me to repeat the tests with different link speeds (e.g. 1GBase-T) or provide additional sysdiagnose output.

 

@KGP 👍

 

intellucy-DHCP-Hardware-automatically.log

intellucy-manualIPv4IPv6-Hardware-manually3.log

intellucy-auto-manually-mixed.log

 

[Mieze]

@KGP-iMacPro The problem might be related to flow control. I discovered that the X550 is unable to negotiate flow control with my Mikrotik switch using a Mikrotik S+RJ10 transceiver. No matter what I chose, it always results in a connection without flow control. As flow control might easily stall a connection when it's not working properly, I assume that the problem could be caused by that issue. Ironically flow control works perfectly when I connect the X550 to my Netgear R7800 router. Looks like at least a part of the problem is located on the other side of the connection. Changing the transceiver's configuration on the switch also doesn't help.

 

In version 1.1.316 I reworked flow control completely but haven't been able to resolve the problem with the Mikrotik switch, but let's see if it shows any improvement on your system. By the way, it doesn't make any difference if you set the IP address manually or use DHCP. If the connection isn't working properly manual configuration doesn't improve things.

 

Mieze 😺

IntelLucy-1.1.316.zip

[kgp]

@Mieze, direct hit 💯💥🙏👍 -> with NICs directly connected to the router -> Ethernet-1 or Ethernet-2 immediately connect (green) after boot or "make inactive" -> "make active" or unplugging/plugging the LAN cable. No toggle at all! Everything works splendid with IntelLucy 1.1.1 both under Sequoia and Tahoe and is absolutely stable💥💯👍 . 

Now what to do with my Netgear ProSafe XS508M switch? Why does it fully work with Smalltree.kext or under Linux? Have not tried IntelLucy 1.1.316 yet. Should I give it a try with the switch included?

Thought to write you immediately to report final success and breakthrough!! 👍

 

KGP

 

Update: Also IntelLucy 1.1.316 behaves flawless with both NICs directly connected to the router (Sequoia and Tahoe). The toggle between green and red continues as soon the switch is implemented.  

  

Edited September 15, 2025 by KGP-iMacPro
fixing typo

[etorix]

So it was the switch all along, mostly or entirely… 😮

[Mieze]

@KGP-iMacPro Congratulations! That's very good news, in particular as version 1.1.316 is also working properly because it will be the base for further development. Compared to 1.1.1 it comes with several enhancements:

• Support for High Sierra and Mojave
• A much cleaner implementation of flow control.
• The ability to cope with at least some of the broken switches (like mine).
• More debug logging to make problem diagnosis easier.

Flow control can be set up in two different ways, using auto negotiation or by forcing the connection parameters. Currently IntelLucy uses auto negotiation, but an option to force flow control might be a solution to get along with problematic switches and I guess that is what the Smalltree driver does. Maybe I'll be able to find a solution that makes everybody happy.

 

Mieze 😺

Edited September 15, 2025 by Mieze
Typo

[kgp]

@etorix, apparently, yes! The entire hardware setup worked flawless with Smalltree and Linux, thus I never removed the switch. I even laid a 30m LAN cable from upstairs to downstairs below carpets to avoid any influence of the former "LAN over WIFI" connection via a WIFI repeater. My family called me "totally crazy" in consequence. 🙃

 

I have been pointed to a possible issue of IntelLucy with the switch today by @Mieze, as she was telling me that she is facing similar issues with her switch and IntelLucy. This finally resulted in the breakthrough 💥.

 

As I have to bypass for now the switch, this achievement is however not any definite solution. By this, I am e.g. unable to use my network scanner/printer and my 40TB NAS (10G), which connected to the same switch.

 

@Mieze, let's hope that soon we can try the forced flow control option with IntelLucy. I am ready for testing and debugging. All is set now on my system to do so. Just let me know as soon we can proceed! 👍

 

KGP 

Edited September 15, 2025 by KGP-iMacPro
Typo

[Mieze]

@KGP-iMacPro Digging deeper I found something, which might be the reason for all the trouble. The driver failed to identify the X550's PHY correctly because the PHY ID was missing in the underlying Linux code. As a result, it assumed a generic copper PHY and I wouldn't be surprised if this was the reason for all the trouble. In the attached version I fixed that issue by adding my PHY ID (0x0154220). I also added more debug messages to help tracking down the issue. Please try this version on your Monterey test installation using the "infamous problem switch" 😹 and send me the debug messages collected with:

log show --predicate 'sender == "IntelLucy"' --last boot

Let's see if it changes anything? Good luck testing!

 

Mieze 😺

IntelLucy-1.1.329.zip

[kgp]

@Mieze, many thanks for the update! IntelLucy-1.1.329 still only works without the switch. Attached the log files with (en1) and without the switch (en0) under Monterey.

 

Best regards,

 

KGP 👍 

 

IntelLucy-1.1.329debug-Monterey-without-switch-working.log

 

IntelLucy-1.1.329debug-Monterey-with-switch-not-working.log

 

[Mieze]

@KGP-iMacPro Same procedure as last time but with the difference that you should select the medium manually because auto-selection of the speed will never result in a stable link due to the incompatibility between the X550 and the switch. Use these settings:

• Speed 10Gbase-T
• No flow control

Please send me the log data. Good luck!

 

Mieze 😺

IntelLucy-1.1.335.zip

[kgp]

@Mieze, I logged two one-timers directly at login (one with v:1.1.329 and another one with v.1.1.335) with DHCP and Hardware on "auto" with 100baseTX, full duplex and Jumbo 1500 greyed out. The led on the switch was blinking in orange. Else, with Hardware on "manually" with 10Gbase-T, full-duplex and Jumbo 9000 running  over 5 minutes, IntelLucy v.1.1.335 was apparently just doing nothing (en1 no toggle at all, permanent red). The respective log file is also quite short when compared with the duration of the test run.

 

About the incompatibility of my "infamous" switch with X550 🙃: To me it rather appears like a incompatibility of IntelLucy with my Netgear ProSafe XS508M, as my entire hardware setup works flawless with the Smalltree.kext (TCP/IP with "DHCP" and "manually", Hardware "automatically" and "manually") and is also just plug and play on Linux. But you certainly might know and understand better what is behind the actual issue with Intellucy and my switch. Anyway, I guess the Netgear ProSafe XS508M is not just a cheap switch and might be commonly in use, having also lifetime warranty. However, unfortunately it is unmanaged. If all our intents would fail I would have to look for another switch compatible with Intellucy, if you know any. I was looking on Amazon for a cheap "web-managed" alternative and found this one. However I guess it won't compare in quality with the Netgear ProSafe XS508M and might not work either with IntelLucy.  

 

Btw... is your X550-AT2 now working flawless with Intellucy and your Mikrotik switch with the Mikrotik S+RJ10 transceiver?

 

Best regards, KGP 👍

 

IntelLucy-1.1.329debug-Monterey-onetimer-with-switch-DHCP-and Hardware-auto-connects-to-100baseTX-full-duplex-Jumbo1500.log

   

IntelLucy-1.1.335debug-Monterey-with-switch-onetimer-Hardware-auto-connects-to-100baseTX-full-duplex-Jumbo1500.log

 

IntelLucy-1.1.335debug-Monterey-with-switch-Hardware-manually-10Gbase-T-fullduplex-Jumbo9000.log

 

 

 

[Mieze]

@KGP-iMacPro Yes, my X550 is working almost perfectly with the latest version I posted. The frequency of an unstable connection after wake has been reduced drastically and in case of a link breakdown it recovers quickly so that I get a stable working connect on the second attempt.

 

The log data shows that we have the same PHY (id =0x1540220, rev=0x1) but it behaves completely different in the test scenarios. According to the logs the connection fails at the hardware level, the PHYs on both ends have difficulties negotiating the link parameters, and there are only two possible causes for this behaviour left: the firmware, which is almost certainly different because my card is new and your board is several years old, and the switch. Unfortunately your switch is unmanaged so that it's impossible to take a look at the parameters and make changes.

 

IntelLucy is based on the ixgbe driver of the Linux kernel version 6.12.7 and all the PHY related code is used with only a few changes (to eliminate build issues) because I don't have the resources (hardware and time) to rewrite and test everything on my own. Two days I also asked in the German Hackintosh-Forum if anybody is experiencing the same issue like no and got an answer while I was writing these lines. The user reports that this switch not only caused problems with the X550, but also with the AQ113 and AQ107, including the Mac mini M1 and the Mac Studio.

 

I'm going to review the last changes to find out in which way they might have made things worse on your machine and in case I find something, I'm going to revert it. Nevertheless, I don't expect a network driver to establish a working link with the default settings (automatic), because it is virtually impossible to account for all ethernet devices on the market. If a perfectly working connection can be established with manual settings, everything is fine from my point of view.

 

Mieze 😺

[kgp]

@Mieze, the X550-AT2 NICs of the Asus X299 Sage 10G anyway perfectly work now with IntelLucy via the direct LAN Connection to the router. Samsung ProXpert C2680FX and my MacBookPro M1 connect via the Netgear ProSafe XS508M and Lan-over-WIFI/WIFI anyway. The only hardware I cannot fully exploit within this configuration is my QNAP -TS431X2 NAS Quad-core 4-Bay NAS tower with Built-in 10GbE SFP+ Port and 4x12 TB Seagate IronWolf in RAID configuration.

 

Anyway, I am more than happy that we found the culprit in my setup and if we don't succeed in fixing the remaining issue by coding within some reasonable and affordable time,  I am totally open to go for a different switch. I just would be glad if you or somebody else could give me some recommendation for an affordable manageable switch with 4X 10G RJ45 and at least 1X 10G SFP+ Port being fully compliant with IntelLucy. btw.. what do you think about the SODOLA 6 Port 10G Easy Web Managed Switch, 4X 10G RJ45 + 2X 10G SFP+ Ports available on Amazon for about 150 Euros? I already asked you this question 😁. 

 

So let's give us a few more tries and otherwise I am going to switch the switch 😅..

 

KGP 👍

 

 

Edited September 21, 2025 by KGP-iMacPro

[meg2014]

So, @KGP-iMacPro, you may remember I am a fan of managed switches, and this is one I use:  https://tinyurl.com/3vfxpw3c.

 

You might have add some transceivers (~$50 US) for your RJ45 connections, and I have, and have had very few issues.  Having said that, everyone's systems vary, so there are never any guarantees.  Good luck.

[kgp]

@meg2014, many thanks for your excellent suggestion, which would be really a way to go also by counting on your very positive experience. Could you please also post a link for the transceivers of your choice? Was investigating managed TP-Link options myself just a couple of hours ago and I found the TP-Link TL-SX3206HPP. I am a bit confused why it appears on the webpage of Omada... Do you know anything about this switch? It would be the upper limit of my budget anyway. 

 

Thanks for all your help,

 

KGP 👍

Edited September 21, 2025 by KGP-iMacPro

[meg2014]

@KGP-iMacPro

 

Transceivers:  H!Fiber 10Gb SFP+ RJ45, (I have six of these and they've been fine) or 6Com (both on Amazon US I have two of these).  Both have recent good reviews.  Price has dropped to ~$32, and even cheaper if you buy more than one at a time.  i had a little better luck with H!Fiber, but keep in mind, they are almost all from Asia.....still, my transceivers have great.  Go to Amazon and plug in either of these names in the search box, and they should come right up.

 

The switch you asked about, well, no I don't know anything about it.  Never heard of it before today.   Omada might just be the model name - as in TP Link intends this to be a series of switches with the Omada name.

 

A managed switch, at least as far as I'm concerned, is really the best choice (if you can afford it, of course).  But maybe some others have other recommendations for switches that will suit your needs.

 

Bye for now.

 

Edited September 21, 2025 by meg2014

[kgp]

@meg2014, @Mieze, and anybody else.. scratching my head between the passively cooled and managed TP-Link TL-SX3008F and the actively cooled and managed TP-Link TL-SX3206HPP. Found this comparison.

 What about heat on the passively cooled TP-Link TL-SX3008F and respective transceivers? Advantage: noiseless I guess.. None of both switches is available here in Germany on Amazon, but I could purchase them at Böttcher for a very good price:   SX3008F , SX3206HPP.

Also the transceivers meg2014 mentioned above are not available at Amazon Germany, but I found these alternatives: TP-Link Transceiver Omada SM5310-T, SFP+ bis 10 Gbit/s, Copper, RJ45 or 10Gtek 10GBase-T SFP+ to RJ-45 Transceiver or WTTOGTEC 10G SFP+ to RJ-45 Transceiver.

 

Update: Just ordered the TP-Link TL-SX3008F at Reichelt for 214 Euros. Now the question about compatible quality transceivers available in Germany 😉

Edited September 22, 2025 by KGP-iMacPro

[etorix]

Mikrotik has nice 4-ports and 9-ports SFP+ managed switches. The manual expressly states that no more than two 10GBase-T transceivers can be used, and not in adjacent slots, due to thermal issues. The advice certainly applies to other passively cooled SFP+ switches. It does not make financial sense to load a SFP+ switch with 10GBase-T transceivers anyway. 

There is now also a passively cooled CRS304 with 4 10GBase-T ports.

 

QNAP has managed switches with some 1G or 2.5G ports and up to 4 combined 10GBase-T/SFP+ ports (QSW-M408-4C, QSW-M2106-4C); actively cooled, but my M408-2C is very quiet.

 

21 hours ago, KGP-iMacPro said:

some recommendation for an affordable manageable switch with 4X 10G RJ45 and at least 1X 10G SFP+ Port

That is a lot of 10GBase-T ports at home. Second-hand enterprise 10GBase-T rack switchs would be wallet-friendly… but presumably loud as hell.

This bigger QSW-M switch might do, except for the price tag I suppose.

 

Maybe stacking switches could be a practical solution?

Or switching some machines to SFP+ so you could rely on a CRS309 and one or two 10GBase-T transceivers? SFP+ switches are cheaper and lower power than 10GBase-T. For short distances, SFP+ DAC cables are cheap, easy and effective. 

 

21 hours ago, KGP-iMacPro said:

what do you think about the SODOLA 6 Port 10G Easy Web Managed Switch, 4X 10G RJ45 + 2X 10G SFP+ Ports available on Amazon for about 150 Euros?

STH has not reviewed this model, but their review of a 12 SFP+ Sodola switch highlights a few shortcomings which, I suspect, may well apply to this model as well: Speed slightly below par, power draw above par, and LOUD fan. Depending where you place it, the last one could be a killer.

Copper 10G runs hot.

[kgp]

@etorix, too late 🙃. I just ordered the TP-Link TL-SX3008F highly recommended by @meg2014 before. I am searching now for adequate SFP+ RJ45 transceivers. I found this one at Amazon.de. What do you think about it or is there any better choice?  

 

[Mieze]

@KGP-iMacPro I have a hard time to recommend a switch with RJ-45 ports because 4 years ago, when I moved to 10Gbit Ethernet, I decided to replace the copper based infrastructure with fiber optics and DAC, because I wanted an energy efficient switch with passive cooling. A 10Gbase-T port consumes about 3W while active , a fiber optics port ~0.7W and a port connected via DAC 0.1W. Therefore it's virtually impossible to find a 10Gbit switch with more than 4 10Gbase-T ports and passive cooling, because active cooling is required to cope with the heat dissipation. Also the energy costs in Germany are very high, which is another reason to avoid RJ-45 ports.

 

I finally bought a Mikrotik CRS309 and I must say that I'm satisfied with the switch itself, but I'm less satisfied with S+RJ-10 transceiver from Mikrotik. The transceiver runs very hot (~50°C idea, 80°C with active connection), like all 10Gbase-T units. The switch stays cool, even in summer its temperature never exceeds 35°C with 1 10Gbase-T, 1 1Gbase-T, 2 fiber optics transceivers and 2 DAC cables. Firmware updates are provided regularly and it works reliable.

 For SFP+ modules, the PHY is always part of the transceiver, so that the S+RJ-10 transceiver is to blame for the connection problems with the X550. Luckily, SFP+ modules can be exchanged easily and in case it fails to work as expected, it can be returned to get a refund.

 

Mieze 😺

Edited September 22, 2025 by Mieze

[kgp]

@Mieze, hmm.. should I cancel the order of the  TP-Link TL-SX3008F in this case if still possible? I was originally thinking of buying 6x SFP+ RJ45 transceivers, but I would be fine with 4x SFP+ RJ45 transceivers, spatially well distributed over the TP-Link TL-SX3008F. Important for me would be "some" quiet switch solution as the switch will remain in my living room (just on my desk behind the computer screen), where from time to time some visitors may stay over night. Finally, I don't know now what to do with the SFP+ RJ45 transceivers either, as you cannot recommend any. I just found as a possible option the 10Gtek SFP+ RJ45 transceiver, which is Amazon's choice here in Germany. 

[Mieze]

@KGP-iMacPro On a passively cooled switch, only have of the SFP+ ports can be populated with 10Gbase-T transceivers because of cooling limitations. Therefore DAC or fiber optics should be preferred but a small number of 10Gbase-T transceivers is acceptable. ServeTheHome as a review of several 10Gbase-T transceivers. They compare performance and power consumption.

Edited September 22, 2025 by Mieze

[kgp]

@Mieze, thus the 8x SFP+ port TP-Link TL-SX3008F hopefully should work with 4x SFP+ RJ45 transceivers, well separated from each other. I will have a look at ServeTheHome reviews for recommended transceivers.

[etorix]

There's a crapton of 10GBase-T transceivers out there—possibly even an imperial crapton rather a metric crapton… STH tested a number of them, and found that they all worked as expected, except that some support NBase-T while others do only 1G or 10G. Choice here should be a non-concern.

10 minutes ago, KGP-iMacPro said:

4x SFP+ RJ45 transceivers, spatially well distributed over the TP-Link TL-SX3008F

This, however, is A LOT of transceivers, at a non-negligible cost, and is likely to cause cooling issues. The SX3206HPP is more like what you need.

It makes no sense to get a SFP+ switch if your network is primarily RJ45: Get a RJ45 switch (actively cooled given the number of ports) and ONE transceiver for your lone SFP+ NAS.

If you get a SFP+ switch, turn as many devices as possible (ideally ALL of them) to SFP+.

 

I've found back the Mikrotik document:

 

Quote

Notes:

• 4. CSS/CRS309-1G-8S+ - supports up to 4 simultaneous S+RJ10 modules. We do not recommend using S+RJ10 in passive cooling devices without additional cooling, as they have relatively high power consumption and in turn high operating temperature. 
• 7. CSS/CRS305-1G-4S+ - supports up to 2 simultaneous S+RJ10 modules