Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BlueToolFixup: Add Skip Address Check patch for 12.4 Beta 3 and newer #20

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 6, 2022

Conversation

khronokernel
Copy link
Member

@khronokernel khronokernel commented May 19, 2022

With macOS 12.4 Beta 3, Apple added new checks inside of bluetoothd where if 2 Bluetooth devices have the same address it would throw an error:

ERROR -- Third Party Dongle has the same address as the internal module

However on some modules, namely the BCM2070 and BCM2046, they would be detected twice by bluetoothd and thus trigger this error. As these older chipsets are the only ones affected (at least with noticeable reports), the patch is configured by -btlfxallowanyaddr argument.

EDIT by @PMheart: Renamed the boot argument to -btlfxallowanyaddr as requested by @dhinakg and @vit9696.

The kSkipAddressCheck patch has been verified functional on 12.4 Beta 3, Beta 4, 12.4 Release and 12.5 Beta 1

@crazyi

This comment was marked as off-topic.

BrcmPatchRAM/BlueToolFixup.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@PMheart PMheart merged commit 209b911 into master Jun 6, 2022
@PMheart PMheart deleted the address-patch branch June 6, 2022 16:03
static const uint8_t kSkipAddressCheckOriginal[] =
{
0x48, 0x89, 0xF3, // mov rbx, rsi
0xE8, 0xE3, 0xF3, 0xFE, 0xFF, // call sub_1000c5bc6
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Duh. The byte sequences have changed in 13.0 b1. We should mask out 0xE3, 0xF3, 0xFE, 0xFF, at a glance. However, there could be more changes as reported by @dhinakg.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

#22

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants