iMac Pro X299 - Live the Future now with macOS 10.14 Mojave [Successful Build/Extended Guide]

[kgp]

@Rulebreaker01,

after all discussion, I derived the following XHC USB kext proposals for the ASRock-X299PGXE attached below. Please note that in both files I already fixed several errors and inconsistencies. Thus, any future iterations please based on these two files, ok?

JYA-iMacPro-ASRock-X299PGXE-XHCI.kext: I would rather assume that also HS10 and HS11 should be part of this kext although not assigned to any physical USB2.0 onboard connector. But it might well be that these ports are used by something like AURA on the Prime X299 Deluxe, which also would complete the 20 available HS/SS ports.

JYA-iMacPro-ASRock-X299PGXE-XHCI-15port.kext: Following your explanations in post #381 concerning header 11 and given that you anyway dropped SSP2, I also removed HS12 from the 15-port kext and added HS02 instead to complete the 15 HS/SS ports implemented. If my above assumptions concerning HS10 and HS11 are correct, rather HS02 and some additional HS port assigned to some external USB2.0 connector should be dropped and HS10 and HS11 implemented instead.

I hope these two files help in approaching definite kext implementations for the ASRock-X299PGXE.

 

[izo1]

How's the stability on 10.14.1?

I'm scared to completely move a production OS to Mojave since I'm still on Adobe CC2018.

 

[kgp]

How's the stability on 10.14.1?

I'm scared to completely move a production OS to Mojave since I'm still on Adobe CC2018.

I would not like to feel guilty for wrong advices and be responsible if something fails with your work, that's why I already did not answer on your former similar request..

For me, 10.14 was already extremely stable during the public betas and nothing changed my mind or impression under 10.14.0 or 10.14.1. There is really nothing to be compared with all problems related to the early 10.13 distributions. I am more than satisfied with my actual 10.14.1 build. Everything works without issues. But certainly I can only talk about my needs and applications, which might be quite different from yours.

Now if you want to implement 10.14.1 without any risk, simply clone your 10.13 system disk and perform the upgrade there.

Anyway you might also think about a clean install of 10.14.1 onto a separate disk, which might be likely the cleaner approach.

Hope this helps somehow...

KGP

 

[RuleBreaker01]

Well up to my knowledge, "255" means USB2.0 internal, while "0" means USB2.0 external. In ports defined such, no USB3.0 device might ever work. Also up to my knowledge, HS and SS ports assigned to USB3.0 ports always must be defined as "3". In case of a USB3.0 Type-C connector, HS can also be "9". There are no USB2.0 Type-C connectors and there are no SS ports assigned to USB2.0 connectors. All distributed XHC USB kexts so far, consider the same above requirements and work flawless such.

If there is an internal USB3.0 header 11 that is assigned to SSP2 and HS12, it must also be part of the fully implemented USB XHC kext by equally considering the above constraints. But anyway we have to be sure that this is really the correct assignment.

Using 255 for *any* internal USB ports is what @RehabMan told me in the thread discussing about this approach when I got him to comment on it.
And I can guarantee you that it work seeing that I'm using it every day. I have that header connected to the front USB ports of my PC case, and my TimeMachine backup disk is connected to it:
My Passport 0748:

Product ID: 0x0748
Vendor ID: 0x1058 (Western Digital Technologies, Inc.)
Version: 10.22
Serial Number: 575832314134334XXXXXXXXX
Speed: Up to 5 Gb/sec
Manufacturer: Western Digital
Location ID: 0x14d00000 / 2
Current Available (mA): 900
Current Required (mA): 896
Extra Operating Current (mA): 0

There aren't any USB 3.0 Type-C connected to the XHCI, so I can't comment about using the 9.

BTW.. it is SSP1 to SSP6 and not SSP01 to SSP06..

It is not, What I quoted was the ACPI path as shown in IORegistry, not the kext's info.plist.



That's the USB drive which according to you doesn't work

 

[RuleBreaker01]

How's the stability on 10.14.1?

I'm scared to completely move a production OS to Mojave since I'm still on Adobe CC2018.

I upgraded on Saturday. So far it's been good (I had been playing with it intermittently using a separate SSD earlier).

As a dev, it's been a pain to get everything to work. C/C++ headers are no longer in /usr/include , you have to install a package. The command line to install the command line tools no longer work and the new headers from the 10.14 SDK can't be compiled with anything but the clang provided by xcode.
Had to hack the 10.13 SDK from another box and copy it locally (Apple always delete all earlier SDK when upgrading)

@kgp has made that upgrade painless, all the tricks and what to do got sorted out, was really a breathe.

 

[kgp]

Using 255 for *any* internal USB ports is what @RehabMan told me in the thread discussing about this approach when I got him to comment on it.
And I can guarantee you that it work seeing that I'm using it every day. I have that header connected to the front USB ports of my PC case, and my TimeMachine backup disk is connected to it:
My Passport 0748:

Product ID: 0x0748
Vendor ID: 0x1058 (Western Digital Technologies, Inc.)
Version: 10.22
Serial Number: 575832314134334XXXXXXXXX
Speed: Up to 5 Gb/sec
Manufacturer: Western Digital
Location ID: 0x14d00000 / 2
Current Available (mA): 900
Current Required (mA): 896
Extra Operating Current (mA): 0

There aren't any USB 3.0 Type-C connected to the XHCI, so I can't comment about using the 9.



It is not, What I quoted was the ACPI path as shown in IORegistry, not the kext's info.plist.

View attachment 363233

That's the USB drive which according to you doesn't work

Good.. anyway I would like to remain consistent with all other kexts and that's why I proposed the implemented changes. "3" instead of "255" anyway also works for sure. Now does the truncated kext attached above also work on your system?

Finally, what to do with header 11, the fully implemented kext and all other remaining questions outlined in post #386?

 

[RuleBreaker01]

[
JYA-iMacPro-ASRock-X299PGXE-XHCI-15port.kext: Following your explanations in post #381 concerning header 11 and given that you anyway dropped SSP2, I also removed HS12 from the 15-port kext and added HS02 instead to complete the 15 HS/SS ports implemented. If my above assumptions concerning HS10 and HS11 are correct, rather HS02 and some additional HS port assigned to some external USB2.0 connector should be dropped and HS10 and HS11 implemented instead.

Oops, my mistake, HS12 is one of the USB 3.0 port on the rear panel, definitely don't want to remove that one..

 

[RuleBreaker01]

Finally, what to do with header 11, the fully implemented kext and all other remaining questions outlined in post #386?

Tomorrow I'll open the case and move from header 13 to header 11 and let you know what it's attached to ...
Now not having a patch for removing the USB limit in mojave may make the task more complicated though, and I no longer have a 10.13 disk.

 

[kgp]

Oops, my mistake, HS12 is one of the USB 3.0 port on the rear panel, definitely don't want to remove that one..

Then you should also not remove SSP2, isn't it? Or otherwise, how should it work with USB3.0 devices, if SSP2 is really assigned with it, as you supposed in post #381?

 

[perfecto245]

@kgp Mate! all good just booted up with my RX 580 in place! now just have to add the SSDT entry for it.. any suggestions mate?