MP51.0087.B00 10.13.5 BootROM update: Missing Microcode...

[h9826790]

Confirmed microcode version 31 is builded inside macOS Mojave. I keep the firmware at stock 0087.B00 (no microcode at all). Then make a clean installation of the latest Mojave public beta, and I got microcode version 31 straight away.

 

[crjackson2134]

What firmware version (0085 I’m guessing) is included in the installer, for those machines that haven’t fw upgraded yet?

Also, have you noticed any type of performance degradation?

Also, isn’t this a microcode that loads every time the OS starts, and wouldn’t that mean that if you are booting other OS’s, you are running without the microcode when booted to them (Linux & Windows)?

 

[rippiedoos]

What firmware version (0085 I’m guessing) is included in the installer, for those machines that haven’t fw upgraded yet?

Also, have you noticed any type of performance degradation?

Also, isn’t this a microcode that loads every time the OS starts, and wouldn’t that mean that if you are booting other OS’s, you are running without the microcode when booted to them (Linux & Windows)?

I know Linux also has microcode in them. CentOS/RHEL/ScientificLinux do for sure and I assume Ubuntu/Debian as well. So that would work the same way I guess.

 

[tsialex]

What firmware version (0085 I’m guessing) is included in the installer, for those machines that haven’t fw upgraded yet?

Also, have you noticed any type of performance degradation?

Also, isn’t this a microcode that loads every time the OS starts, and wouldn’t that mean that if you are booting other OS’s, you are running without the microcode when booted to them (Linux & Windows)?

1) Mojave DP3 has 0085 version to update any previous BootROM.

2) Didn't notice, but I'm not using betas to work. Betas are problematic to benchmark, so much logging and not yet optimized code. Maybe someone did some benchmarking and can answer this question with numbers.

3) Yes, the BootROM firmware initializes the CPU, the OS can update it later - macOS and Linux do the microcode update. Windows seems the problem, various people reported that Windows didn't boot after 0087 was installed, so we may have a problem here.

Edit: I had the impression that stock 0087 didn't boot Windows, but I'm wrong.

 

[crjackson2134]

It’s annoying that they push 0087 earlier, then pull back to 0085. This leaves those of us who have the suspect 0087 fw, to our own methods of stabilizing fw versions. I suppose it’s not a insurmountable problem, but it is annoying for those of us who are OCD about uniformity.

Hopefully the endgame is a polished version of the 0087 that will bring some kind of enhancement for everyone.
Time will tell I guess.

If I wanted (because I’ve been having various booting issues since 0087) to re-flash with the 0085 fw, how exactly would I be able to do that?

 

[tsialex]

It’s annoying that they push 0087 earlier, then pull back to 0085. This leaves those of us who have the suspect 0087 fw, to our own methods of stabilizing fw versions. I suppose it’s not a insurmountable problem, but it is annoying for those of us who are OCD about uniformity.

Hopefully the endgame is a polished version of the 0087 that will bring some kind of enhancement for everyone.
Time will tell I guess.

If I wanted (because I’ve been having various booting issues since 0087) to re-flash with the 0085 fw, how exactly would I be able to do that?

I have the impression that we will see more frequent BootROM updates onwards, Intel have a lot to correct yet.

IMHO, Apple will have to provide the microcode corrections on the firmware to at least the people needing older OS X and other OSes that do not automatically updates with the most recent available.

Another thing, how FileVault will work with two suggested GPUs that does not have EFI? Perhaps Apple will have to change something here too. Maybe Cupertino will just end FV and boot screens support for the people on the new GPUs, like on Mojave betas?

 

[h9826790]

1) Mojave DP3 has 0085 version to update any previous BootROM.
View attachment 769058
2) Didn't notice, but I'm not using betas to work. Betas are problematic to benchmark, so much logging and not yet optimized code. Maybe someone did some benchmarking and can answer this question with numbers.

3) Yes, the BootROM firmware initializes the CPU, the OS can update it later - macOS and Linux do the microcode update. Windows seems the problem, various people reported that Windows didn't boot after 0087 was installed, so we may have a problem here.

The problem is not the stock 0087.B00, but the modded version.

If update to the stock 0087.B00 (no microcode), Windows can boot without issue. However, after inject the microcode, existing Windows will shows "unsupported processor", but can still make a new clean Windows installation.

 

[tsialex]

The problem is not the stock 0087.B00, but the modded version.

If update to the stock 0087.B00 (no microcode), Windows can boot without issue. However, after inject the microcode, existing Windows will shows "unsupported processor", but can still make a new clean Windows installation.

Good to know, thx. I had the impression that stock 0087 had trouble booting Windows. At least I had trouble booting linux rescue pendrives and CloneZilla.

 

[h9826790]

It’s annoying that they push 0087 earlier, then pull back to 0085. This leaves those of us who have the suspect 0087 fw, to our own methods of stabilizing fw versions. I suppose it’s not a insurmountable problem, but it is annoying for those of us who are OCD about uniformity.

Hopefully the endgame is a polished version of the 0087 that will bring some kind of enhancement for everyone.
Time will tell I guess.

If I wanted (because I’ve been having various booting issues since 0087) to re-flash with the 0085 fw, how exactly would I be able to do that?

Rename the MP51_0085_00B_LOCKED.fd to MP51_0088_00B_LOCKED.fd inside the installer and run the installer should do the trick.

Anyway, it's better dump and keep the bin file safe for every single version's firmware from your own cMP now. It will make the downgrade much much easier (simply use ROMTool to flash the old firmware back in).

 

[Partridge]

The problem is not the stock 0087.B00, but the modded version.

If update to the stock 0087.B00 (no microcode), Windows can boot without issue. However, after inject the microcode, existing Windows will shows "unsupported processor", but can still make a new clean Windows installation.

With my install, after I injected the microcode into 0087, I couldn’t even boot off a fresh windows install DVD. It was a complete no-go.

 

[crjackson2134]

That was quick and painless now I'm back to;

Boot ROM Version: MP51.0085.B00
[doublepost=1530750859][/doublepost]

With my install, after I injected the microcode into 0087, I couldn’t even boot off a fresh windows install DVD. It was a complete no-go.

I've actually been having booting problems with the stock 0087 code. Windows, Linux, thumb drives w/macOS Install, DVD installers (Win/Linux), Live-CD's with Linux, and on and on....

 

[tsialex]

I've actually been having booting problems with the stock 0087 code. Windows, Linux, thumb drives w/macOS Install, DVD installers (Win/Linux), Live-CD's with Linux, and on and on....

I had trouble with CloneZilla and older Linux rescue CDs, until I downgraded from stock 0087 back to 0085.

 

[crjackson2134]

I had trouble with CloneZilla and older Linux rescue CDs, until I downgraded back to 0085.

Same here, CloneZilla, Ubuntu, GPartEd...

I've also lost my boot chime. I can do a PRAM reset and get it back, but it only last ONE boot, then it's gone again.

I think that may have something to do with my ACHI/PCIe Apple Blade SSD. I'm going to test this tomorrow.

 

[Partridge]

Same here, CloneZilla, Ubuntu, GPartEd...

I've also lost my boot chime. I can do a PRAM reset and get it back, but it only last ONE boot, then it's gone again.

I think that may have something to do with my ACHI/PCIe Apple Blade SSD. I'm going to test this tomorrow.

I went so far as to remove all the drives and pci cards from my system and switch back to the stock video card. Still no dvd boot. Unsupported processor, so it was definitely the injected code.

 

[crjackson2134]

It may have only been luck of the draw, but when I tested my Win boot drive after the fw regression, it was so fast I couldn’t believe it. I tried it a few more times and it was extraordinarily fast as compared to recently on 0087.

 

[h9826790]

Same here, CloneZilla, Ubuntu, GPartEd...

I've also lost my boot chime. I can do a PRAM reset and get it back, but it only last ONE boot, then it's gone again.

I think that may have something to do with my ACHI/PCIe Apple Blade SSD. I'm going to test this tomorrow.

That boot chime is suppressed by High Sierra. It seems if once you boot to High Sierra, that boot chime will gone until next PRAM reset.

 

[crjackson2134]

That boot chime is suppressed by High Sierra. It seems if once you boot to High Sierra, that boot chime will gone until next PRAM reset.

Good to know, I'll stop fighting against it I guess.

I tried to remedy the problem with...

sudo nvram -d SystemAudioVolume

but it only worked for ONE reboot.

Anyway, it's fixed now.

 

[flowrider]

That boot chime is suppressed by High Sierra. It seems if once you boot to High Sierra, that boot chime will gone until next PRAM reset.

I have no issue with boot chime.

Lou

 

[crjackson2134]

I have no issue with boot chime.

Lou

I lost mine in the 10.13.4 update. I've done 50-60 PRAM/SMC resets. Fixes it every time... FOR ONE BOOT ONLY.

Issuing the terminal command does the same here. IDK what the fudge is going on. I just know that when I don't hear the chime, it worries me that something is amiss. If HS isn't suppressing it, then IDK what to think.😕

 

[LightBulbFun]

I lost mine in the 10.13.4 update. I've done 50-60 PRAM/SMC resets. Fixes it every time... FOR ONE BOOT ONLY.

Issuing the terminal command does the same here. IDK what the fudge is going on. I just know that when I don't hear the chime, it worries me that something is amiss. If HS isn't suppressing it, then IDK what to think.😕

make sure your alert volume is turned up and also make sure play feedback when volume is changed is ticked for good messure

My MP5,1 chimes every time and im running 10.13.5 (and have booted Mojave too)

 

[crjackson2134]

View attachment 769169

Problem Solved!

 

[frou]

When 10.13.6 is released, I will blow-away my startup drive partition (including EFI/Recovery) to bare metal as it were. I'll format from scratch, install the new 10.13.6 and test for sound and startup chime. Assuming all works well, I'll add apps one at a time and do 2 reboots after each until I find the critter causing the problem.

Dare I say... too much time on yer hands 😛

 

[crjackson2134]

Dare I say... too much time on yer hands 😛

I didn't say it would be a quick or instant process. That's why I have several other boot drives.

Besides, if you knew my situation and why I have time, you probably wouldn't say that.

Anyway, Issue Resolved now.

 

[esjr]

I didn't say it would be a quick or instant process. That's why I have several other boot drives.

Besides, if you knew my situation and why I have time, you probably wouldn't say that.

Anyway, Issue Resolved now.

I believe that is a Styx song being referenced, not any comment on your process.

 

[bookemdano]

Anyway, Issue Resolved now.

Out of curiosity, how did you resolve it?