Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MP 1,1-5,1 MacPro5,1: BootROM thread | 144.0.0.0.0

Status
The first post of this thread is a WikiPost and can be edited by anyone with the appropiate permissions. Your edits will be public.
FlorisVN

FlorisVN

macrumors 6502a
Nov 8, 2013
979
380
tsialex said:
I was checking what Apple released yesterday on the Seed channel, to check any new firmware updates to my other Macs and opened the Mac App Store to check the last build of 10.13.6 Security Update 2019-002.

This is what I saw when opened the Past Purchases list, now sorted alphabetically:

View attachment 822529

Just took 8 years to do this…
Click to expand...

Lol
 
B

bsbeamer

macrumors 601
Sep 19, 2012
4,313
2,713
141.0.0.0.0 is the latest BETA BootROM release.
140.0.0.0.0 is the latest PUBLIC BootROM release.
 
MIKX

MIKX

macrumors 68000
Dec 16, 2004
1,815
691
Japan
bsbeamer

Thanks for that info.

ny news on what changes are implemented in 141.0.0.0.0 yet ?

I wonder what surprises the final 141.0.0.0.0 has waiting for us . . booting from USB 3.0 ?

They will surely have to implement that for the 2019-20 new Mac pro so why not test it our on us first.

That would be the icing on the cake for many of us.

=================================================

In the past few years we have actually had a lot of good things happen.

1. High Sierra 10.13.6 - IMHO. much better than Sierra

2. USB 3.0 - 3.1 PCIe

3. Booting from NVMe M.2 ( being able to do away with internal SATA II HDDs )

4. New GPU cards ( nVIDIA being the exception due to lack of drivers in Mojave.

5. eGPU - getting smaller & better performing.

=================================================

I m seriously considering getting a good condition 2012 cMP even if expensive due mainly to the ease of upgrading the CPUs and of course being 3 years younger than the 4,1.

Mac Pro was an inspired design mistake by Apple .. .thank God.
 
h9826790

h9826790

macrumors P6
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
bsbeamer said:
Same microcodes (version 31) for dual X5690 with 140.0.0.0.0 firmware.

The only difference I can spot from this screenshot vs my report would be for physical cpu address bits (40 vs 36) but do not believe that is firmware update related.
Click to expand...

Despite Intel says W3690 has 40bit Physical Address Extensions, I still doubt about it. Because W3680 also only has 36bit, but X5680 has 40bit officially. I can't see why W3690 is so special in this case.

I suspect Intel actually put the wrong info on their webpage.
 
cococheaf

cococheaf

macrumors regular
Jul 10, 2018
102
54
Austria - Lake of Constance
could it be that the changes they made to the 141 firmware are supposed to clean up the entire firmware so that we are able to try implementing usb3 dxe on 141? i know for sure that they are watching this thread daily... this is also a example of them interacting here: when @tsialex injected the nvme dxe into the 138 rom, they self-implemented it in 140 :)
 
tsialex

tsialex

Contributor
Original poster
Jun 13, 2016
13,455
13,602
MIKX said:
bsbeamer

Thanks for that info.

ny news on what changes are implemented in 141.0.0.0.0 yet ?

I wonder what surprises the final 141.0.0.0.0 has waiting for us . . booting from USB 3.0 ?

They will surely have to implement that for the 2019-20 new Mac pro so why not test it our on us first.

That would be the icing on the cake for many of us.

=================================================

In the past few years we have actually had a lot of good things happen.

1. High Sierra 10.13.6 - IMHO. much better than Sierra

2. USB 3.0 - 3.1 PCIe

3. Booting from NVMe M.2 ( being able to do away with internal SATA II HDDs )

4. New GPU cards ( nVIDIA being the exception due to lack of drivers in Mojave.

5. eGPU - getting smaller & better performing.

=================================================

I m seriously considering getting a good condition 2012 cMP even if expensive due mainly to the ease of upgrading the CPUs and of course being 3 years younger than the 4,1.

Mac Pro was an inspired design mistake by Apple .. .thank God.
Click to expand...

cococheaf said:
could it be that the changes they made to the 141 firmware is meant to clean up the entire firmware so that we are able to try implementing usb3 dxe on 141? i know that they are watching this thread daily...
Click to expand...


This is a factual thread, please stop conjecturing.

To discuss this type of thing, please go to the MP7,1 or open one dedicated to whatever. NOT HERE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: itdk92 and TheStork
cococheaf

cococheaf

macrumors regular
Jul 10, 2018
102
54
Austria - Lake of Constance
tsialex said:
People junked the Blade thread, this is not going to happen here.

Facts only, please.
Click to expand...

there were only facts in my post:

- Apple is watching this thread - FACT
- they injected nvme dxe because of this thread - FACT
- they WILL implement USB3 dxe - FACT - you will see...

I have always contributed to the thread and helped a lot of people in testing and recovering, often with spi flashers and with all the knowledge i have... i do not want to argue with you... shame on you, you've could have been more friendly when asking to stop conjecturing. THAT'S A FACT.
 
tsialex

tsialex

Contributor
Original poster
Jun 13, 2016
13,455
13,602
cococheaf said:
there were only facts in my post:

- Apple is watching this thread - FACT
- they injected nvme dxe because of this thread - FACT
- they WILL implement USB3 dxe - FACT - you will see...

I have always contributed to the thread and helped a lot of people in testing and recovering, often with spi flashers and with all the knowledge i have... i do not want to argue with you... shame on you, you've could have been more friendly when asking to stop conjecturing. THAT'S A FACT.
Click to expand...

Understand one thing, you start your post reasonably factual, a second person goes on conjecturing, a page later this thread turned into MP7,1/NVIDIA threads.

Do you want this? Please open a dedicated thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fangio, Macschrauber, Reindeer_Games and 3 others
h9826790

h9826790

macrumors P6
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
cococheaf said:
there were only facts in my post:

- Apple is watching this thread - FACT
- they injected nvme dxe because of this thread - FACT
- they WILL implement USB3 dxe - FACT - you will see...

I have always contributed to the thread and helped a lot of people in testing and recovering, often with spi flashers and with all the knowledge i have... i do not want to argue with you... shame on you, you've could have been more friendly when asking to stop conjecturing. THAT'S A FACT.
Click to expand...

I feel sorry too, but all three points are your own opinion. No prove that they are facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kohlson, TheIguana, TheStork and 4 others
G

ger_mat

macrumors newbie
Feb 20, 2019
4
1
Germany
Hi, I'm new to this discussion and haven't read all 2839 Posts jet, so be kind with me if I'm miss something.

So while googling some thing about my MacPro 5,1 and the RX 570 (coming in the mail this week) I stumbled on this thread. I mainly use my MacPro for gaming so Win10 is installed but I have an macOS 10.13.6 drive which I swap in from time to time.

So first I checked if my Windows is UEFI (according to msinfo32 it runs in UEFI-mode). I don't have the exact install method in mind but it was preparing an SSD and dropping it in and all gone.
Then I spend half the day getting a BootROM-Dump (MP51.0089.B00) from my MacPro to check for multiple Certificates. Yes I have two of them.

So I thought, before getting more in trouble better reinstall Win10 in legacy-mode. I poped in an empty SSD (GPT) an a Win10-install-DVD (1803) which, as far as I know, should install in legacy-mode. I installed and checked with msinfo32 and it still says UEFI.

So what am I getting wrong?
 
tsialex

tsialex

Contributor
Original poster
Jun 13, 2016
13,455
13,602
ger_mat said:
Hi, I'm new to this discussion and haven't read all 2839 Posts jet, so be kind with me if I'm miss something.

So while googling some thing about my MacPro 5,1 and the RX 570 (coming in the mail this week) I stumbled on this thread. I mainly use my MacPro for gaming so Win10 is installed but I have an macOS 10.13.6 drive which I swap in from time to time.

So first I checked if my Windows is UEFI (according to msinfo32 it runs in UEFI-mode). I don't have the exact install method in mind but it was preparing an SSD and dropping it in and all gone.
Then I spend half the day getting a BootROM-Dump (MP51.0089.B00) from my MacPro to check for multiple Certificates. Yes I have two of them.

So I thought, before getting more in trouble better reinstall Win10 in legacy-mode. I poped in an empty SSD (GPT) an a Win10-install-DVD (1803) which, as far as I know, should install in legacy-mode. I installed and checked with msinfo32 and it still says UEFI.

So what am I getting wrong?
Click to expand...
Do you have a diskutil list for your Windows SSD?

Code: 
diskutil list

I'll send you a PM with instructions about cleaning up SecureBoot certificates and upgrading.
[doublepost=1550669385][/doublepost]Btw, CSM installs use MBR not GPT. Another thing, a CSM W10 drive have only two partitions, an UEFI one have four.
 
G

ger_mat

macrumors newbie
Feb 20, 2019
4
1
Germany
tsialex said:
Do you have a diskutil list for your Windows SSD?

Code: 
diskutil list

I'll send you a PM with instructions about cleaning up SecureBoot certificates and upgrading.
[doublepost=1550669385][/doublepost]Btw, CSM installs use MBR not GPT. Another thing, a CSM W10 drive have only two partitions, an UEFI one have four.
Click to expand...

This is my old and trusty Win10-disk:
Code: 
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      GUID_partition_scheme                        *240.1 GB   disk3
   1:           Windows Recovery                         523.2 MB   disk3s1
   2:                        EFI NO NAME                 104.9 MB   disk3s2
   3:         Microsoft Reserved                         16.8 MB    disk3s3
   4:       Microsoft Basic Data BOOTCAMP                239.4 GB   disk3s4

This is the DVD-install I just did:
Code: 
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      GUID_partition_scheme                        *256.1 GB   disk3
   1:                        EFI EFI                     209.7 MB   disk3s1
   2:       Microsoft Basic Data                         255.8 GB   disk3s2

I stumme both are UEFI but how can I install in legacy-mode from DVD?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Speedstar
tsialex

tsialex

Contributor
Original poster
Jun 13, 2016
13,455
13,602
ger_mat said:
This is my old and trusty Win10-disk:
Code: 
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      GUID_partition_scheme                        *240.1 GB   disk3
   1:           Windows Recovery                         523.2 MB   disk3s1
   2:                        EFI NO NAME                 104.9 MB   disk3s2
   3:         Microsoft Reserved                         16.8 MB    disk3s3
   4:       Microsoft Basic Data BOOTCAMP                239.4 GB   disk3s4

This is the DVD-install I just did:
Code: 
   #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
   0:      GUID_partition_scheme                        *256.1 GB   disk3
   1:                        EFI EFI                     209.7 MB   disk3s1
   2:       Microsoft Basic Data                         255.8 GB   disk3s2

I stumme both are UEFI but how can I install in legacy-mode from DVD?
Click to expand...

Remove the GPT/GUID format of the disk with gpt destroy, with something like this:

Code: 
diskutil list
sudo gpt destroy diskXX

Then reinstall from the DVD, it will default to CSM/legacy now.
 
G

ger_mat

macrumors newbie
Feb 20, 2019
4
1
Germany
Looks like I didn't pay attention yesterday. My MacPro might have booted from the DVD in EFI-Boot by default.
After manuell selection of the DVD in Startupmanager I was able to install Win10 in legacy-mode. Thanks.
 
tsialex

tsialex

Contributor
Original poster
Jun 13, 2016
13,455
13,602
retta283 said:
I was referring to the stated App Store problem that all purchases prior to 2019 showed a purchase date of Jan 1, 1970. Should've made that clearer, my apologies
Click to expand...
This only happens with 10.13.6 DPs, no? They are changing the past purchases since the previous DP, maybe this need integration with the MAS backend.
 
tsialex

tsialex

Contributor
Original poster
Jun 13, 2016
13,455
13,602
It's not a common occurrence, but again two IASInstallPhaseList.plists into a NVRAM:

Screen Shot 2019-02-25 at 07.44.04.png


Code: 
IASInstallPhaseList<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd">
<plist version="1.0">
<array>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Software Update Post Logout</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>5</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Boot 1</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>8</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Language Chooser</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>2</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>OS Installer</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>3</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Boot 2</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>8</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Language Chooser 2</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>2</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>OS Installer 2</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>67</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Boot 3</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>5</integer>
    </dict>
</array>
</plist>

Code: 
IASInstallPhaseList<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE plist PUBLIC "-//Apple//DTD PLIST 1.0//EN" "http://www.apple.com/DTDs/PropertyList-1.0.dtd">
<plist version="1.0">
<array>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Software Update Post Logout</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>5</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Boot 1</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>8</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Language Chooser</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>2</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>OS Installer</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>3</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Boot 2</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>8</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Language Chooser 2</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>2</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>OS Installer 2</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>67</integer>
    </dict>
    <dict>
        <key>ConclusionDelay</key>
        <integer>0</integer>
        <key>InstallPhase</key>
        <string>Boot 3</string>
        <key>InstallPhasePercentageKey</key>
        <integer>5</integer>
    </dict>
</array>
</plist>

This Mac Pro 1st/2nd streams of the NVRAM volume are almost full, even have GFXVENDOR setting and the binary blobs that block TITAN GPUs to work. I'd really like to understand what causes this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alex Sanders74, bsbeamer and h9826790
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom