On 7/11/14, 11:59, "Kamble, Nitin A" <[email protected]> wrote:
>From: Nitin A Kamble <[email protected]> > >This recipe provides the microcode datafile for Intel Processors. > >The recipe provides: > 1. microcode.dat file for microcode updating from user space with the > iucode-tool utility. > 2. the microcode cpio file which gets bundled with the initrd to support > microcode loading at early boot time. > >Note that this recipe has LICENSE_FLAGS so will need to be whitelisted >before >it's usable. This should be documented in the layer someplace. Can be done as a follow-up patch. > >[ YOCTO #5114 ] > >Signed-off-by: Ross Burton <[email protected]> >Signed-off-by: Nitin A Kamble <[email protected]> >--- > common/custom-licenses/Intel-Microcode-License | 123 >+++++++++++++++++++++ > .../microcode/intel-microcode_20140430.bb | 53 +++++++++ > 2 files changed, 176 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 common/custom-licenses/Intel-Microcode-License > create mode 100644 >common/recipes-core/microcode/intel-microcode_20140430.bb ... > >diff --git a/common/recipes-core/microcode/intel-microcode_20140430.bb >b/common/recipes-core/microcode/intel-microcode_20140430.bb >new file mode 100644 >index 0000000..f8aa45f >--- /dev/null >+++ b/common/recipes-core/microcode/intel-microcode_20140430.bb >@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ >+SUMMARY = "Intel Processor Microcode Datafile for Linux" >+HOMEPAGE = "http://www.intel.com/"; >+DESCRIPTION = "The microcode data file contains the latest microcode\ >+ definitions for all Intel processors. Intel releases microcode updates\ >+ to correct processor behavior as documented in the respective processor\ >+ specification updates. While the regular approach to getting this >microcode\ >+ update is via a BIOS upgrade, Intel realizes that this can be an\ >+ administrative hassle. The Linux operating system and VMware ESX\ >+ products have a mechanism to update the microcode after booting.\ >+ For example, this file will be used by the operating system mechanism\ >+ if the file is placed in the /etc/firmware directory of the Linux >system." >+ >+LICENSE = "Intel-Microcode-License" >+LICENSE_FLAGS = "license_${PN}_${PV}" >+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = >"file://microcode.dat;md5=64b91c8f504ef24a040ca129d1c2f657" >+ >+SRC_URI = >"http://downloadmirror.intel.com/23829/eng/microcode-20140430.tgz"; >+SRC_URI[md5sum] = "99c811133b002d1e73150f667a6a77f4" >+SRC_URI[sha256sum] = >"2e67767fd561164a2b09831020c2d36600ad336a9c0c117f1964edef284e4351" Why do we provide both? Is this accepted best practice? Just seems like extra maintenance to me... Otherwise, looks good, no objections. -- Darren Hart Open Source Technology Center [email protected] Intel Corporation -- _______________________________________________ meta-intel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-intel
