Contribute
Register

Gigabyte Z490 Vision D (Thunderbolt 3) + i5-10400 + AMD RX 580

We can generate a new serial number through OpenCore Configurator itself, as shown:
View attachment 501170
Step 1: Click as shown and select system name.
Step 2: Click Check Coverage and verify that the new System Serial Number is not already in use. If you see error message from the coverage website, then you are Good.
I used GenSMBIOS and keep getting the repeat errors. I'll give OC Configurator a try. Assume it works just like Clover Configurator did, thanks!
 
Atleast with Catalina and earlier, it loads a different kernel cache called the "Immutable Kernel", allows loading kexts like AirportItlwm as IO80211Family is included. The same cache is used with or without secure boot though in Big Sur. Most macs by default now have secure boot enabled though, including those without a T2 chip, so it seems to be the expected state for macs now.

It's additional security that really doesn't have any reason to be turned off tbh.

I run into a few issues with secure boot enabled.

1. My Aquantia 10GBE Gaming NIC will not work at all unless I put secure boot disabled. I don't know why. It works out of the box on Catalina and Mojave (at least last time I had Mojave it did) and requires a kext patch on Big Sur, but will not work at all with Secure Boot on in either OS.

2. I can't seem to boot a Big Sur USB to install it with secure boot enabled. Works fine and installed 11.1 to a new NVMe without a problem with it off.

PS: For me, if I load the Big Sur version of AirportItlwm with secure boot disabled, it seems to work, at least in the installer. I did not test post-install. The Aquantia NIC behaves the same in the installer and post install depending on secure boot though.
 
I run into a few issues with secure boot enabled.

1. My Aquantia 10GBE Gaming NIC will not work at all unless I put secure boot disabled. I don't know why. It works out of the box on Catalina and Mojave (at least last time I had Mojave it did) and requires a kext patch on Big Sur, but will not work at all with Secure Boot on in either OS.

2. I can't seem to boot a Big Sur USB to install it with secure boot enabled. Works fine and installed 11.1 to a new NVMe without a problem with it off.

PS: For me, if I load the Big Sur version of AirportItlwm with secure boot disabled, it seems to work, at least in the installer. I did not test post-install. The Aquantia NIC behaves the same in the installer and post install depending on secure boot though.
I was having problems with aquantia as well, and that’s why I turned it off. But I haven’t tested it in several weeks...

edit: with secure boot model set to Default on 0.6.4 (and resetting nvram after I changed it from Disabled ) I don’t see any difference. Aquantia 10 Gbe fires on just fine on Big Sur.
 
Last edited:
Hi @CaseySJ, I have one question althought I've updated to 11.1 successfully. Why cannot I get the new update (Big Sur 11.1) when I disable SIP (FF0F0000)? When I enable SIP (0000000), I can get the update and install successfully. I'm using OC 0.6.4. Tks you so much :D
 
ahaha!

Unrelated, anyone here has this issue, after macOS wakes up, all text on all applications is blurry? And also clicking on anything that is clickable won't work. It does the animation, but nothing happens.

The text just goes crispy and stuff is clickable after I click on top of the window, or resize it. When I do this, the application goes back to having crispy text and I can actually click on stuff on it.

This happens with all the applications... Not sure what this can be related to? I use dual monitors btw. 4K@60HZ and 2K@144HZ
Anyone?
 
I run into a few issues with secure boot enabled.

1. My Aquantia 10GBE Gaming NIC will not work at all unless I put secure boot disabled. I don't know why. It works out of the box on Catalina and Mojave (at least last time I had Mojave it did) and requires a kext patch on Big Sur, but will not work at all with Secure Boot on in either OS.
Can you tell me what chipset does your Aquantia uses and what kext patch do you have to use for it?
 
So I've finally made the leap full time - I upgraded OC to 0.6.4, and then I made a new bootable backup of my Catalina install just to be on the safe side, and then did the Big Sur 11.1 update (I had the previous Big Sur version installed on a separate partition initially, just to see what it was like) - surprisingly, everything software-wise still works. I haven't lost compatibility with any of my software/plugins etc. This is great!

However, I have run into a new USB issue. When using certain USB ports on the back, my front case ports don't work! This setup worked perfectly fine in Catalina, so I'm guessing this is something to do with Big Sur being more strict with USB ports? I am using @CaseySJ's latest 0.6.4 EFI folder, with SSDT-UIAC-Vision-D-V2.aml and USBInjectAll.kext active.

Here is what I have discovered:
  • When HS03 is in use (USB2 Apogee Duet Interface), I lose SS06 (When USB3 stick is inserted, the Apogee disconnects for a moment, then reconnects. The USB stick doesn't show up at all.)
  • If I unplug HS03, I regain complete functionality of SS06.
  • When HS01 is in use (USB2 Apple MagSafe iPhone charger), I lose SS05 (same symptoms as above)
  • Unplugging HS01 (MagSafe charger) gives me back full functionality of SS05.
Looking at my USB ports in Hackintool, I can see that the Location ID of these ports are the same in each respective case of conflict:
  • HS03 and SS06 both share 0x14200000
  • HS01 and SS05 both share 0x14100000
Am I right in my deductions, that they are clashing because once we reach our 15 port limit, (1-9,A-F) the cycle starts again because macOS doesn't know how to allocate the extra ports? And it is this clashing that is stopping me from using my ports as intended?

My problem can be avoided if I don't use HS01/HS03, but that obviously leaves me with 1 less USB-C port and 1 less USB3 port overall. I tried making my own USBPorts.kext by removing the ports I won't be using (ie USB3 side of the USB ports I am using with USB2 devices) to get down to 15, but that didn't seem to change the allocation of the port numbers, and so they were still clashing.

Congratulations if you made it to the end of this post! :lol: And if anyone can help shed some more light on the issue/solution I would be eternally grateful!
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2020-12-16 at 12.09.09.png
    Screenshot 2020-12-16 at 12.09.09.png
    296.4 KB · Views: 43
Last edited:
Back
Top