Got a tip for us?
Let us know
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
- Thread starter tsialex
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
https://www.macrumors.com/2019/05/15/apple-seeds-macos-mojave-10-14-6-beta-1/
Which bootrom version is there?
Which bootrom version is there?
There have been a couple reports of recent updates causing the loss of video on reddit. Is it possible that the new updates require the 144 rom to work correctly? (Both HS and Mojave)
Also, is it possible to fill up NVRAM with just RAM swaps, and not just Secure Boot certs?
Also, is it possible to fill up NVRAM with just RAM swaps, and not just Secure Boot certs?
That's a pretty major find. The requirements to load this BootROM are pretty high, and just short of actually installing Mojave itself? Without a standalone or security updates that can install it, this would unintentionally have a requirement of a metal-compatible video card, right?
With a supported METAL GPU it's easy to upgrade to 144.0.0.0.0 using Mojave 10.14.5 installer as a bootstrap.
Exactly. The only way to circumvent is to reconstruct the BootROM, but this is a complex procedure that only a few people can accomplish.
Last edited:
Just close the Mojave installer after you upgrade your firmware, use this instructions MP5,1: What you have to do to upgrade to Mojave (BootROM upgrade instructions).
It's not maintainable to make another set of instructions that need to be edited frequently since Recovery source files are always changing the name and the URL.
Btw, the first post have instructions linked for 10.14.3 and if you know you way with SUS catalog you can find yourself the current name/url and use the instructions.
Hmm... that post is about disabling Hyperthreading, not loss of GPU after the updates. I'll do some more searching. Thanks.
I just showed that the security updates are linked to 144.0.0.0.0 and don't work without it.
Seems to work, but it works AFTER the macOS is fully loaded while Apple SMTDisable NVRAM setting works at kernel time. This need to be fully understood.
Cool I was literally typing this exact question but I didn't read all the newest posts at first. I was wondering if there was a difference between using terminal commands to disable hyper threading vs. using an app such as CPU Setter
oh I wanted to add if someone is on an earlier bootrom than 144 the app CPU Setter will work for disabling hyper threading. when I was on earlier bootroms this app always worked for me for that function at least
Last edited:
I am beginning to think I am getting too paranoid about all this myself........
Don’t exactly spend ages online on my mac, and it’s usually important stuff like banking etc, which you would hope are secure (no silly flashing ads like macrumors have).
[doublepost=1558114440][/doublepost]
i.e. once fw is updated to 144, can i disable HT from either high sierra or mojave.
Don’t exactly spend ages online on my mac, and it’s usually important stuff like banking etc, which you would hope are secure (no silly flashing ads like macrumors have).
[doublepost=1558114440][/doublepost]
Is the setting system wide or per boot volume?
i.e. once fw is updated to 144, can i disable HT from either high sierra or mojave.
Last edited:
Since it's a NVRAM setting, the configuration works for any 10.12.6 + 2019-003 / 10.13.6 + 2019-003 / 10.14.5 macOS disks that you have installed in your Mac Pro. You do it once, all your macOS installs that have the mitigation will respect that.
Yes, my previous posts #3590 and #3600 clearly show that I used High Sierra for the tests.
I'll add more info for the previous posts to make this clear.
Dang. I do audio production using many threads, its really not an option to disable hyperthreading for me. I will just have to take other precautions and hope I don't catch a cold from this I guess. What other ways are there for mitigating this besides dumbing down our X5680?
FWIW, "hyperthreading" is a hardware feature in the CPU and "multithreading" is a completely different concept performed in software. So disabling hyperthreading will not necessarily impact a multithreaded program. This might be obvious already, but I thought it would be worth mentioning just for those who didn't understand at first (like me).