Wrong! See post
#2,122 !
The XCPM core scope patch is only required for motherboards with locked MSR register, which is definitely not the case on GA motherboards and it is also not the case for all other motherboards different from GA, as even now ASUS BIOS firmware allows after my efforts at ASUS to disable the MSR lock in the BIOS settings.
My entire guidelines base on using an unlocked MSR register for kernel write and therefore the XCPM core scope patch is also by default disabled in my default EFI-Folder distributions! Always provided an unlocked MSR register, Syklake-X is implemented by macOS fully vanilla! No need for any xcpm kernel patches!
It is true that apparently I was implementing the wrong XCPM core scope patch since 10.14 public beta 3, and I did not even realise this flaw, as neither me nor anybody else with unlocked MSR register has any need to enable this remaining XCPM core scope patch, which is anyway
DISABLED by default in my default 10.14 EFI-Folder distributions!
Anyway, I wonder why you did not come up much earlier with a friendly advice to correct this flaw, which is anyway totally unimportant for anybody following my guidelines to unlock the MSR register! Many thanks for outpointing this apparent but negligible flaw in my 10.14 EFI-Folder distributions at least now.
Well.. apparently on your X299 GA AORUS GAMING 7, the ACPI device path for Slot-1 changes when also populating Slot-5, no idea why this might be the case. However, anyway one has to consider and verify the correct device path implementation for SSDT creation or adaptation at any time. Thus, in your case one certainly and apparently needs to properly readapt the GPU SSDT implementation after adding or removing a device in Slot-5.
As in any of my iterations for providing the appropriate SSDTs for
@nmano, I always revised and considered respective ACPI tables provided in his updated IOREG.saves and also revised in addition after each step his provided PCI snapshots, I don't see any relevance for this never ending and weird discussion from your side, moreover as
@mano just confirmed that his former sleep/wake issues have been induced by a xcpm patch I never implemented for Skylake-X and he should not have used at all! Thus his entire sleep/wake issues have not been SSDT related, which we also confirmed by several tests along the last 300 posts.
The last year, I configured hundreds of EFI-Folders and SSDTs for different people and all systems are perfectly working including sleep/wake. I guess, I really know what I do and I really do not need your respective advises. However, nobody is perfect and e.g. the actual flaw in the XCPM core scope patch implemented in my 10.14 EFI-Folder distributions, although anyway always disabled by default and not needed at all if one properly follows my guidelines, clearly shows that also I do commit errors within the anyway manyfold information and material I provide or distirubtue to the community. And I am indeed grateful to anybody for any related corrections or friendly advises.
However, you repeatedly confronted with people along this thread due to your way of transmitting things and opinions. That you now also crash up with me seems just to be another consequence of the latter. The latter was btw also the final reason apart from many other reasons, why I finally decided to abandon the Hackinosh community for a while.
Despite all my unpaid efforts for the community, I feel that my work is neither respected nor appreciated by some of my followers, as I am still continuously questioned and offended for all the free and voluntary non-profit work I am doing here. The initial idea of my guides and threads was also to establish a fruitful collaboration with active contributions and help also provided by others. My guides and threads where never meant to be a place for people not contributing at all and just polishing and manifesting their egos at costs of others. Despite all contributions by few really estimated users, I am performing all work and support here lately basically alone, which finally occupies my entire life and was never intended such by myself from the very beginning.
Finally I don't reject your
useful inputs to the community, the opposite is the case:
View attachment 389272
But I certainly do not need your advises for doing my own work and I dislike that you permanently question or interfere my own work moreover!
Thus, I leave it up to you, if your above post was your last post here or anywhere else. This is your personal decision and neither related with me nor anybody else. However, if you keep on posting here, try to relativise your ego and importance. If you continue with posts like the last one above, which in my personal opinion basically has primarily the intention to discredit me and my work in the community by polishing and justifying your own ego at the same time, I indeed would prefer personally that you keep-on posting somewhere else.
All the best,
KGP