On 03/30/2016 04:45 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote:
Hello Saul!
I noticed that you changed meta-intel.inc from extending INITRD to
INITRD_LIVE:
meta-intel rev: cdbf029110327a51c0
This address a boot issue based on using the new bootimg code that
makes a distiction between Live and VM type of image so they can
co-exisit.
# for the early boot time kernel microcode loading support,
# merge the microcode data in the final initrd image.
-INITRD_prepend = "${@bb.utils.contains('MACHINE_FEATURES', 'intel-ucode',
'${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/microcode.cpio ', '', d)}"
+INITRD_LIVE_prepend = "${@bb.utils.contains('MACHINE_FEATURES', 'intel-ucode',
'${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/microcode.cpio ', '', d)}"
In Ostro OS, we are not using bootimg. Our own code still uses INITRD,
which means that we no longer including the microcode.cpio in our
initramfs.
I think that if you don't use booimg (live), but use vm (virtual machine) image,
AFAIK, INITRD is a must for live image (hddimg, iso), but optional for vm image,
if you are sure that only vm is needed, then you can change the line to:
INITRD_VM_prepend = "${@bb.utils.contains('MACHINE_FEATURES', 'intel-ucode',
'${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/microcode.cpio ', '', d)}"
// Robert
Is that intentional? In other words, which kinds of images are supposed
to use the microcode and which are not?
Shouldn't meta-intel.inc better extend both INITRD and INITRD_LIVE?
--
_______________________________________________
meta-intel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/meta-intel
