| Message ID | 20250908105315.19583-2-m-shah@ti.com |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Ryan Eatmon |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add recipes to build initramfs image | expand |
After some discussion in a call with Denys today, I think we have some feedback on what is needed to better leverage this patch idea. 1) We need the way to get this image built as part of the build process. The best way to accomplish that will likely be to follow the firmware approach and include it in the MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable for each platform that requires it. 2) We need a better way to specify the list of MODULES rather than hardcoding the list in the recipe. The list of required modules will likely be different for different platforms. To that end we recommend creating a new variable that should be defined in the ti-soc.inc: TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= "" Then in each platform specific .inc file we can set that list to the needed modules based on the ti-bsp need. Our vendor kernels do not need it, so it could remain blank, but the mainline/next bsps could set it since those actually create the kernel module packages. TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-mainline = " mod1 mod2" TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-next = " mod1 mod2" Then in the ti-initrd-image.bb you would drop the MODULES="" setting and just change to the variable TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. This way, if there are other layers that want to create their own initramfs we have a variable in place for them to use to include the required modules based on the kernel version that is being built. So, I would probably break all of this up into multiple patches. The first patch would the work in #2 above to establish the needed variable for all platforms. The next patches are your patches but moving to TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. And the final patch would be adding your new ti-initrd-image into MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS list for all platforms. Did I miss anything, Denys? On 9/8/2025 5:53 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: > Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used > for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package > boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by > initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. > > Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> > --- > .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ > .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 +++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb > create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb > > diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000..8847cb2e > --- /dev/null > +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb > @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ > +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" > + > +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb > + > +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" > diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000..f6b99073 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb > @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ > +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" > + > +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ > + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ > + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ > +" > + > +LICENSE = "MIT" > + > +inherit core-image > + > +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" > + > +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" > + > +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" > + > +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" > + > +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" > + > +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ > + initramfs-framework-base \ > + initramfs-module-udev \ > + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ > +" > + > +MODULES = "\ > + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ > + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ > + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ > +" > + > +UTILS = "\ > + cifs-utils \ > + nfs-utils \ > + nfs-utils-client \ > +" > + > +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ > + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ > + ${UTILS} \ > + ${MODULES} \ > + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ > +" > + > +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" > + > +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot directory from > +# the final image this is usually done by adding RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" > +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this method. Instead we > +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. > +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " > +empty_boot_dir () { > + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* > +}
Hey Ryan, Thanks for the detailed review. On 12/09/25 21:42, Ryan Eatmon wrote: > > After some discussion in a call with Denys today, I think we have some > feedback on what is needed to better leverage this patch idea. > > 1) We need the way to get this image built as part of the build > process. The best way to accomplish that will likely be to follow the > firmware approach and include it in the > MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable for each platform that > requires it. I was planning to do something like: do_rootfs[depends] += "ti-initrd-image:do_image_complete" ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "install_initrd_to_boot; " install_initrd_to_boot() { install -m 0644 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/initrd.cpio ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/initrd.cpio } in core-image-%.bbappend file to make this image as a part of core image build. I will look out for how I can achieve the same with MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS. Is the above solution optimal though? Since all of the K3 platforms will be shifting to the initrd flow. > > 2) We need a better way to specify the list of MODULES rather than > hardcoding the list in the recipe. The list of required modules will > likely be different for different platforms. > > To that end we recommend creating a new variable that should be > defined in the ti-soc.inc: > > TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= "" > > Then in each platform specific .inc file we can set that list to the > needed modules based on the ti-bsp need. Our vendor kernels do not > need it, so it could remain blank, but the mainline/next bsps could > set it since those actually create the kernel module packages. > > TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-mainline = " mod1 mod2" > TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-next = " mod1 mod2" > > Then in the ti-initrd-image.bb you would drop the MODULES="" setting > and just change to the variable TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. > > This way, if there are other layers that want to create their own > initramfs we have a variable in place for them to use to include the > required modules based on the kernel version that is being built. Seems like a better solution for including the modules, I'll fix it in v2. > > > > So, I would probably break all of this up into multiple patches. The > first patch would the work in #2 above to establish the needed > variable for all platforms. The next patches are your patches but > moving to TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. And the final patch would be > adding your new ti-initrd-image into > MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS list for all platforms. Noted. Regards, Moteen > > Did I miss anything, Denys? > > > On 9/8/2025 5:53 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >> Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used >> for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package >> boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by >> initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. >> >> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> >> --- >> .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ >> .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 +++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 >> meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >> >> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000..8847cb2e >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ >> +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" >> + >> +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb >> + >> +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" >> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000..f6b99073 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ >> +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" >> + >> +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ >> + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ >> + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ >> +" >> + >> +LICENSE = "MIT" >> + >> +inherit core-image >> + >> +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" >> + >> +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" >> + >> +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" >> + >> +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" >> + >> +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" >> + >> +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ >> + initramfs-framework-base \ >> + initramfs-module-udev \ >> + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ >> +" >> + >> +MODULES = "\ >> + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ >> + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ >> + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ >> +" >> + >> +UTILS = "\ >> + cifs-utils \ >> + nfs-utils \ >> + nfs-utils-client \ >> +" >> + >> +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ >> + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ >> + ${UTILS} \ >> + ${MODULES} \ >> + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ >> +" >> + >> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" >> + >> +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot >> directory from >> +# the final image this is usually done by adding >> RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" >> +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this method. >> Instead we >> +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. >> +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " >> +empty_boot_dir () { >> + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* >> +} >
On 9/15/2025 1:12 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: > Hey Ryan, > Thanks for the detailed review. > > On 12/09/25 21:42, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >> >> After some discussion in a call with Denys today, I think we have some >> feedback on what is needed to better leverage this patch idea. >> >> 1) We need the way to get this image built as part of the build >> process. The best way to accomplish that will likely be to follow the >> firmware approach and include it in the >> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable for each platform that >> requires it. > > I was planning to do something like: > > do_rootfs[depends] += "ti-initrd-image:do_image_complete" > ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "install_initrd_to_boot; " > install_initrd_to_boot() { > install -m 0644 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/initrd.cpio > ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/initrd.cpio > } > > in core-image-%.bbappend file to make this image as a part of core image > build. > > I will look out for how I can achieve the same with > MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS. > > Is the above solution optimal though? Since all of the K3 platforms will > be shifting to the initrd flow. There are more distributions than just poky and arago. The solution I suggested will work for all of them and not require anything specific like your solution. >> >> 2) We need a better way to specify the list of MODULES rather than >> hardcoding the list in the recipe. The list of required modules will >> likely be different for different platforms. >> >> To that end we recommend creating a new variable that should be >> defined in the ti-soc.inc: >> >> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= "" >> >> Then in each platform specific .inc file we can set that list to the >> needed modules based on the ti-bsp need. Our vendor kernels do not >> need it, so it could remain blank, but the mainline/next bsps could >> set it since those actually create the kernel module packages. >> >> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-mainline = " mod1 mod2" >> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-next = " mod1 mod2" >> >> Then in the ti-initrd-image.bb you would drop the MODULES="" setting >> and just change to the variable TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. >> >> This way, if there are other layers that want to create their own >> initramfs we have a variable in place for them to use to include the >> required modules based on the kernel version that is being built. > > Seems like a better solution for including the modules, I'll fix it in v2. > >> >> >> >> So, I would probably break all of this up into multiple patches. The >> first patch would the work in #2 above to establish the needed >> variable for all platforms. The next patches are your patches but >> moving to TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. And the final patch would be >> adding your new ti-initrd-image into >> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS list for all platforms. > > Noted. > > Regards, > Moteen > >> >> Did I miss anything, Denys? >> >> >> On 9/8/2025 5:53 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>> Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used >>> for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package >>> boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by >>> initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> >>> --- >>> .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ >>> .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 +++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 >>> meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>> >>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 00000000..8847cb2e >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ >>> +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" >>> + >>> +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb >>> + >>> +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" >>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 00000000..f6b99073 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ >>> +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" >>> + >>> +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ >>> + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ >>> + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ >>> +" >>> + >>> +LICENSE = "MIT" >>> + >>> +inherit core-image >>> + >>> +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" >>> + >>> +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" >>> + >>> +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" >>> + >>> +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" >>> + >>> +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" >>> + >>> +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ >>> + initramfs-framework-base \ >>> + initramfs-module-udev \ >>> + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ >>> +" >>> + >>> +MODULES = "\ >>> + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ >>> + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ >>> + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ >>> +" >>> + >>> +UTILS = "\ >>> + cifs-utils \ >>> + nfs-utils \ >>> + nfs-utils-client \ >>> +" >>> + >>> +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ >>> + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ >>> + ${UTILS} \ >>> + ${MODULES} \ >>> + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ >>> +" >>> + >>> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" >>> + >>> +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot >>> directory from >>> +# the final image this is usually done by adding >>> RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" >>> +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this method. >>> Instead we >>> +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. >>> +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " >>> +empty_boot_dir () { >>> + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* >>> +} >>
Hey Ryan, On 15/09/25 17:14, Ryan Eatmon wrote: > > > On 9/15/2025 1:12 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >> Hey Ryan, >> Thanks for the detailed review. >> >> On 12/09/25 21:42, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >>> >>> After some discussion in a call with Denys today, I think we have >>> some feedback on what is needed to better leverage this patch idea. >>> >>> 1) We need the way to get this image built as part of the build >>> process. The best way to accomplish that will likely be to follow >>> the firmware approach and include it in the >>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable for each platform that >>> requires it. >> >> I was planning to do something like: >> >> do_rootfs[depends] += "ti-initrd-image:do_image_complete" >> ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "install_initrd_to_boot; " >> install_initrd_to_boot() { >> install -m 0644 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/initrd.cpio >> ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/initrd.cpio >> } >> >> in core-image-%.bbappend file to make this image as a part of core >> image build. >> >> I will look out for how I can achieve the same with >> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS. >> >> Is the above solution optimal though? Since all of the K3 platforms >> will be shifting to the initrd flow. > > There are more distributions than just poky and arago. The solution I > suggested will work for all of them and not require anything specific > like your solution. > Understood, I will use MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMEND inside k3.inc, but how should I include the initrd image in the boot directory of the root partition, since initrd itself is an image I cannot use ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} inside ti-initrd-image.bb. I did found a way around it https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/47500, not really sure if its the correct way. Regards, Moteen > >>> >>> 2) We need a better way to specify the list of MODULES rather than >>> hardcoding the list in the recipe. The list of required modules >>> will likely be different for different platforms. >>> >>> To that end we recommend creating a new variable that should be >>> defined in the ti-soc.inc: >>> >>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= "" >>> >>> Then in each platform specific .inc file we can set that list to the >>> needed modules based on the ti-bsp need. Our vendor kernels do not >>> need it, so it could remain blank, but the mainline/next bsps could >>> set it since those actually create the kernel module packages. >>> >>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-mainline = " mod1 mod2" >>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-next = " mod1 mod2" >>> >>> Then in the ti-initrd-image.bb you would drop the MODULES="" setting >>> and just change to the variable TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. >>> >>> This way, if there are other layers that want to create their own >>> initramfs we have a variable in place for them to use to include the >>> required modules based on the kernel version that is being built. >> >> Seems like a better solution for including the modules, I'll fix it >> in v2. >> >>> >>> >>> >>> So, I would probably break all of this up into multiple patches. The >>> first patch would the work in #2 above to establish the needed >>> variable for all platforms. The next patches are your patches but >>> moving to TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. And the final patch would be >>> adding your new ti-initrd-image into >>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS list for all platforms. >> >> Noted. >> >> Regards, >> Moteen >> >>> >>> Did I miss anything, Denys? >>> >>> >>> On 9/8/2025 5:53 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>>> Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used >>>> for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package >>>> boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by >>>> initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> >>>> --- >>>> .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ >>>> .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 >>>> meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>> >>>> diff --git >>>> a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 00000000..8847cb2e >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ >>>> +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" >>>> + >>>> +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb >>>> + >>>> +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" >>>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 00000000..f6b99073 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ >>>> +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" >>>> + >>>> +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ >>>> + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ >>>> + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ >>>> +" >>>> + >>>> +LICENSE = "MIT" >>>> + >>>> +inherit core-image >>>> + >>>> +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" >>>> + >>>> +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" >>>> + >>>> +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" >>>> + >>>> +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" >>>> + >>>> +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" >>>> + >>>> +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ >>>> + initramfs-framework-base \ >>>> + initramfs-module-udev \ >>>> + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ >>>> +" >>>> + >>>> +MODULES = "\ >>>> + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ >>>> + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ >>>> + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ >>>> +" >>>> + >>>> +UTILS = "\ >>>> + cifs-utils \ >>>> + nfs-utils \ >>>> + nfs-utils-client \ >>>> +" >>>> + >>>> +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ >>>> + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ >>>> + ${UTILS} \ >>>> + ${MODULES} \ >>>> + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ >>>> +" >>>> + >>>> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" >>>> + >>>> +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot >>>> directory from >>>> +# the final image this is usually done by adding >>>> RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" >>>> +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this method. >>>> Instead we >>>> +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. >>>> +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " >>>> +empty_boot_dir () { >>>> + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* >>>> +} >>> >
Hey Ryan, On 17/09/25 13:28, Moteen Shah via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > Hey Ryan, > > On 15/09/25 17:14, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >> >> >> On 9/15/2025 1:12 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>> Hey Ryan, >>> Thanks for the detailed review. >>> >>> On 12/09/25 21:42, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >>>> >>>> After some discussion in a call with Denys today, I think we have >>>> some feedback on what is needed to better leverage this patch idea. >>>> >>>> 1) We need the way to get this image built as part of the build >>>> process. The best way to accomplish that will likely be to follow >>>> the firmware approach and include it in the >>>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable for each platform that >>>> requires it. >>> >>> I was planning to do something like: >>> >>> do_rootfs[depends] += "ti-initrd-image:do_image_complete" >>> ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "install_initrd_to_boot; " >>> install_initrd_to_boot() { >>> install -m 0644 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/initrd.cpio >>> ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/initrd.cpio >>> } >>> >>> in core-image-%.bbappend file to make this image as a part of core >>> image build. >>> >>> I will look out for how I can achieve the same with >>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS. >>> >>> Is the above solution optimal though? Since all of the K3 platforms >>> will be shifting to the initrd flow. >> >> There are more distributions than just poky and arago. The solution >> I suggested will work for all of them and not require anything >> specific like your solution. >> > > Understood, I will use MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMEND inside > k3.inc, but how should I include the initrd image in the boot > directory of the root partition, since initrd itself is an image I > cannot use ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} inside ti-initrd-image.bb. I did found a > way around it https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/47500, > not really sure if its the correct way. > > Regards, > Moteen > Adding on the thread, using MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMEND does not builds the initrd.cpio. I suspect that the tag is used to include packages and since ti-initrd-image is recipe for image itself and not a package it does not work. As a workaround to the issue, I am using: do_image_complete[depends] += "ti-initrd-image:do_image_complete" in the platform specific .inc files. Regards, Moteen >> >>>> >>>> 2) We need a better way to specify the list of MODULES rather than >>>> hardcoding the list in the recipe. The list of required modules >>>> will likely be different for different platforms. >>>> >>>> To that end we recommend creating a new variable that should be >>>> defined in the ti-soc.inc: >>>> >>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= "" >>>> >>>> Then in each platform specific .inc file we can set that list to >>>> the needed modules based on the ti-bsp need. Our vendor kernels do >>>> not need it, so it could remain blank, but the mainline/next bsps >>>> could set it since those actually create the kernel module packages. >>>> >>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-mainline = " mod1 mod2" >>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-next = " mod1 mod2" >>>> >>>> Then in the ti-initrd-image.bb you would drop the MODULES="" >>>> setting and just change to the variable TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. >>>> >>>> This way, if there are other layers that want to create their own >>>> initramfs we have a variable in place for them to use to include >>>> the required modules based on the kernel version that is being built. >>> >>> Seems like a better solution for including the modules, I'll fix it >>> in v2. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So, I would probably break all of this up into multiple patches. >>>> The first patch would the work in #2 above to establish the needed >>>> variable for all platforms. The next patches are your patches but >>>> moving to TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. And the final patch would >>>> be adding your new ti-initrd-image into >>>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS list for all platforms. >>> >>> Noted. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Moteen >>> >>>> >>>> Did I miss anything, Denys? >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/8/2025 5:53 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>>>> Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used >>>>> for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package >>>>> boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by >>>>> initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ >>>>> .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) >>>>> create mode 100644 >>>>> meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>> >>>>> diff --git >>>>> a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 00000000..8847cb2e >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ >>>>> +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" >>>>> + >>>>> +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb >>>>> + >>>>> +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" >>>>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 00000000..f6b99073 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ >>>>> +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" >>>>> + >>>>> +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ >>>>> + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ >>>>> + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +LICENSE = "MIT" >>>>> + >>>>> +inherit core-image >>>>> + >>>>> +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" >>>>> + >>>>> +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" >>>>> + >>>>> +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" >>>>> + >>>>> +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" >>>>> + >>>>> +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" >>>>> + >>>>> +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ >>>>> + initramfs-framework-base \ >>>>> + initramfs-module-udev \ >>>>> + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +MODULES = "\ >>>>> + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ >>>>> + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ >>>>> + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +UTILS = "\ >>>>> + cifs-utils \ >>>>> + nfs-utils \ >>>>> + nfs-utils-client \ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ >>>>> + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ >>>>> + ${UTILS} \ >>>>> + ${MODULES} \ >>>>> + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" >>>>> + >>>>> +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot >>>>> directory from >>>>> +# the final image this is usually done by adding >>>>> RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" >>>>> +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this >>>>> method. Instead we >>>>> +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. >>>>> +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " >>>>> +empty_boot_dir () { >>>>> + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* >>>>> +} >>>> >> > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#19015): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/19015 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/115128108/9997635 > Group Owner: meta-ti+owner@lists.yoctoproject.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/unsub [m-shah@ti.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >
On 9/17/2025 2:58 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: > Hey Ryan, > > On 15/09/25 17:14, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >> >> >> On 9/15/2025 1:12 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>> Hey Ryan, >>> Thanks for the detailed review. >>> >>> On 12/09/25 21:42, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >>>> >>>> After some discussion in a call with Denys today, I think we have >>>> some feedback on what is needed to better leverage this patch idea. >>>> >>>> 1) We need the way to get this image built as part of the build >>>> process. The best way to accomplish that will likely be to follow >>>> the firmware approach and include it in the >>>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable for each platform that >>>> requires it. >>> >>> I was planning to do something like: >>> >>> do_rootfs[depends] += "ti-initrd-image:do_image_complete" >>> ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "install_initrd_to_boot; " >>> install_initrd_to_boot() { >>> install -m 0644 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/initrd.cpio >>> ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/initrd.cpio >>> } >>> >>> in core-image-%.bbappend file to make this image as a part of core >>> image build. >>> >>> I will look out for how I can achieve the same with >>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS. >>> >>> Is the above solution optimal though? Since all of the K3 platforms >>> will be shifting to the initrd flow. >> >> There are more distributions than just poky and arago. The solution I >> suggested will work for all of them and not require anything specific >> like your solution. >> > > Understood, I will use MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMEND inside k3.inc, > but how should I include the initrd image in the boot directory of the > root partition, since initrd itself is an image I cannot use > ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} inside ti-initrd-image.bb. I did found a way around it > https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/47500, not really sure if > its the correct way. Why does the initrd need to be in the rootfs? The whole point of this initrd is to get the kernel to boot to get to the point of loading the rootfs, at which point the initrd has served it's purpose. > Regards, > Moteen > >> >>>> >>>> 2) We need a better way to specify the list of MODULES rather than >>>> hardcoding the list in the recipe. The list of required modules >>>> will likely be different for different platforms. >>>> >>>> To that end we recommend creating a new variable that should be >>>> defined in the ti-soc.inc: >>>> >>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= "" >>>> >>>> Then in each platform specific .inc file we can set that list to the >>>> needed modules based on the ti-bsp need. Our vendor kernels do not >>>> need it, so it could remain blank, but the mainline/next bsps could >>>> set it since those actually create the kernel module packages. >>>> >>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-mainline = " mod1 mod2" >>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-next = " mod1 mod2" >>>> >>>> Then in the ti-initrd-image.bb you would drop the MODULES="" setting >>>> and just change to the variable TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. >>>> >>>> This way, if there are other layers that want to create their own >>>> initramfs we have a variable in place for them to use to include the >>>> required modules based on the kernel version that is being built. >>> >>> Seems like a better solution for including the modules, I'll fix it >>> in v2. >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> So, I would probably break all of this up into multiple patches. The >>>> first patch would the work in #2 above to establish the needed >>>> variable for all platforms. The next patches are your patches but >>>> moving to TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. And the final patch would be >>>> adding your new ti-initrd-image into >>>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS list for all platforms. >>> >>> Noted. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Moteen >>> >>>> >>>> Did I miss anything, Denys? >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/8/2025 5:53 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>>>> Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used >>>>> for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package >>>>> boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by >>>>> initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ >>>>> .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) >>>>> create mode 100644 >>>>> meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>> >>>>> diff --git >>>>> a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 00000000..8847cb2e >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ >>>>> +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" >>>>> + >>>>> +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb >>>>> + >>>>> +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" >>>>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>> index 00000000..f6b99073 >>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ >>>>> +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" >>>>> + >>>>> +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ >>>>> + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ >>>>> + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +LICENSE = "MIT" >>>>> + >>>>> +inherit core-image >>>>> + >>>>> +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" >>>>> + >>>>> +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" >>>>> + >>>>> +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" >>>>> + >>>>> +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" >>>>> + >>>>> +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" >>>>> + >>>>> +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ >>>>> + initramfs-framework-base \ >>>>> + initramfs-module-udev \ >>>>> + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +MODULES = "\ >>>>> + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ >>>>> + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ >>>>> + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +UTILS = "\ >>>>> + cifs-utils \ >>>>> + nfs-utils \ >>>>> + nfs-utils-client \ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ >>>>> + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ >>>>> + ${UTILS} \ >>>>> + ${MODULES} \ >>>>> + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ >>>>> +" >>>>> + >>>>> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" >>>>> + >>>>> +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot >>>>> directory from >>>>> +# the final image this is usually done by adding >>>>> RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" >>>>> +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this method. >>>>> Instead we >>>>> +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. >>>>> +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " >>>>> +empty_boot_dir () { >>>>> + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* >>>>> +} >>>> >>
On 17/09/25 20:14, Ryan Eatmon via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > > > On 9/17/2025 2:58 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >> Hey Ryan, >> >> On 15/09/25 17:14, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 9/15/2025 1:12 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>>> Hey Ryan, >>>> Thanks for the detailed review. >>>> >>>> On 12/09/25 21:42, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >>>>> >>>>> After some discussion in a call with Denys today, I think we have >>>>> some feedback on what is needed to better leverage this patch idea. >>>>> >>>>> 1) We need the way to get this image built as part of the build >>>>> process. The best way to accomplish that will likely be to follow >>>>> the firmware approach and include it in the >>>>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable for each platform >>>>> that requires it. >>>> >>>> I was planning to do something like: >>>> >>>> do_rootfs[depends] += "ti-initrd-image:do_image_complete" >>>> ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "install_initrd_to_boot; " >>>> install_initrd_to_boot() { >>>> install -m 0644 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/initrd.cpio >>>> ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/initrd.cpio >>>> } >>>> >>>> in core-image-%.bbappend file to make this image as a part of core >>>> image build. >>>> >>>> I will look out for how I can achieve the same with >>>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS. >>>> >>>> Is the above solution optimal though? Since all of the K3 platforms >>>> will be shifting to the initrd flow. >>> >>> There are more distributions than just poky and arago. The solution >>> I suggested will work for all of them and not require anything >>> specific like your solution. >>> >> >> Understood, I will use MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMEND inside >> k3.inc, but how should I include the initrd image in the boot >> directory of the root partition, since initrd itself is an image I >> cannot use ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} inside ti-initrd-image.bb. I did found a >> way around it https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/47500, >> not really sure if its the correct way. > > Why does the initrd need to be in the rootfs? The whole point of this > initrd is to get the kernel to boot to get to the point of loading the > rootfs, at which point the initrd has served it's purpose. I was keeping it inside the rootfs to avoid increasing size of the boot partition, grub was able to read/load it from any of the required partitions given in the SD Card. I will put it in the boot partition after increasing its size then in v2. Regards, Moteen > > >> Regards, >> Moteen >> >>> >>>>> >>>>> 2) We need a better way to specify the list of MODULES rather than >>>>> hardcoding the list in the recipe. The list of required modules >>>>> will likely be different for different platforms. >>>>> >>>>> To that end we recommend creating a new variable that should be >>>>> defined in the ti-soc.inc: >>>>> >>>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= "" >>>>> >>>>> Then in each platform specific .inc file we can set that list to >>>>> the needed modules based on the ti-bsp need. Our vendor kernels >>>>> do not need it, so it could remain blank, but the mainline/next >>>>> bsps could set it since those actually create the kernel module >>>>> packages. >>>>> >>>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-mainline = " mod1 mod2" >>>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-next = " mod1 mod2" >>>>> >>>>> Then in the ti-initrd-image.bb you would drop the MODULES="" >>>>> setting and just change to the variable TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. >>>>> >>>>> This way, if there are other layers that want to create their own >>>>> initramfs we have a variable in place for them to use to include >>>>> the required modules based on the kernel version that is being built. >>>> >>>> Seems like a better solution for including the modules, I'll fix it >>>> in v2. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, I would probably break all of this up into multiple patches. >>>>> The first patch would the work in #2 above to establish the needed >>>>> variable for all platforms. The next patches are your patches but >>>>> moving to TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. And the final patch would >>>>> be adding your new ti-initrd-image into >>>>> MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS list for all platforms. >>>> >>>> Noted. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Moteen >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Did I miss anything, Denys? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9/8/2025 5:53 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>>>>> Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used >>>>>> for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package >>>>>> boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by >>>>>> initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ >>>>>> .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 >>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) >>>>>> create mode 100644 >>>>>> meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>>> create mode 100644 >>>>>> meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git >>>>>> a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>>> index 00000000..8847cb2e >>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ >>>>>> +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb >>>>>> + >>>>>> +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" >>>>>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>>> b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>>> index 00000000..f6b99073 >>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ >>>>>> +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ >>>>>> + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ >>>>>> + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ >>>>>> +" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +LICENSE = "MIT" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +inherit core-image >>>>>> + >>>>>> +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ >>>>>> + initramfs-framework-base \ >>>>>> + initramfs-module-udev \ >>>>>> + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ >>>>>> +" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +MODULES = "\ >>>>>> + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ >>>>>> + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ >>>>>> + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ >>>>>> +" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +UTILS = "\ >>>>>> + cifs-utils \ >>>>>> + nfs-utils \ >>>>>> + nfs-utils-client \ >>>>>> +" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ >>>>>> + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ >>>>>> + ${UTILS} \ >>>>>> + ${MODULES} \ >>>>>> + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ >>>>>> +" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" >>>>>> + >>>>>> +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot >>>>>> directory from >>>>>> +# the final image this is usually done by adding >>>>>> RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" >>>>>> +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this >>>>>> method. Instead we >>>>>> +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. >>>>>> +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " >>>>>> +empty_boot_dir () { >>>>>> + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* >>>>>> +} >>>>> >>> > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#19017): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/19017 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/115128108/9997635 > Group Owner: meta-ti+owner@lists.yoctoproject.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/unsub [m-shah@ti.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >
On 9/18/25 12:54 AM, Moteen Shah via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: > > On 17/09/25 20:14, Ryan Eatmon via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote: >> >> >> On 9/17/2025 2:58 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>> Hey Ryan, >>> >>> On 15/09/25 17:14, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/15/2025 1:12 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>>>> Hey Ryan, >>>>> Thanks for the detailed review. >>>>> >>>>> On 12/09/25 21:42, Ryan Eatmon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> After some discussion in a call with Denys today, I think we have some feedback on what is needed to better leverage this patch idea. >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) We need the way to get this image built as part of the build process. The best way to accomplish that will likely be to follow the firmware approach and include it in the MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS variable for each platform that requires it. >>>>> >>>>> I was planning to do something like: >>>>> >>>>> do_rootfs[depends] += "ti-initrd-image:do_image_complete" >>>>> ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "install_initrd_to_boot; " >>>>> install_initrd_to_boot() { >>>>> install -m 0644 ${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/initrd.cpio ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/initrd.cpio >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> in core-image-%.bbappend file to make this image as a part of core image build. >>>>> >>>>> I will look out for how I can achieve the same with MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS. >>>>> >>>>> Is the above solution optimal though? Since all of the K3 platforms will be shifting to the initrd flow. >>>> >>>> There are more distributions than just poky and arago. The solution I suggested will work for all of them and not require anything specific like your solution. >>>> >>> >>> Understood, I will use MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMEND inside k3.inc, but how should I include the initrd image in the boot directory of the root partition, since initrd itself is an image I cannot use ${IMAGE_ROOTFS} inside ti-initrd-image.bb. I did found a way around it https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/47500, not really sure if its the correct way. >> >> Why does the initrd need to be in the rootfs? The whole point of this initrd is to get the kernel to boot to get to the point of loading the rootfs, at which point the initrd has served it's purpose. > > I was keeping it inside the rootfs to avoid increasing size of the boot partition, grub was able to read/load it from any of the required partitions given in the SD Card. I will put it in the boot partition after increasing its size then in v2. > Rootfs is the right spot, it should go in the same spot as the other Linux boot components (kernel and DTB) which we should have in rootfs. Andrew > Regards, > Moteen > >> >> >>> Regards, >>> Moteen >>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2) We need a better way to specify the list of MODULES rather than hardcoding the list in the recipe. The list of required modules will likely be different for different platforms. >>>>>> >>>>>> To that end we recommend creating a new variable that should be defined in the ti-soc.inc: >>>>>> >>>>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= "" >>>>>> >>>>>> Then in each platform specific .inc file we can set that list to the needed modules based on the ti-bsp need. Our vendor kernels do not need it, so it could remain blank, but the mainline/next bsps could set it since those actually create the kernel module packages. >>>>>> >>>>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-mainline = " mod1 mod2" >>>>>> TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES:append:bsp-next = " mod1 mod2" >>>>>> >>>>>> Then in the ti-initrd-image.bb you would drop the MODULES="" setting and just change to the variable TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. >>>>>> >>>>>> This way, if there are other layers that want to create their own initramfs we have a variable in place for them to use to include the required modules based on the kernel version that is being built. >>>>> >>>>> Seems like a better solution for including the modules, I'll fix it in v2. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So, I would probably break all of this up into multiple patches. The first patch would the work in #2 above to establish the needed variable for all platforms. The next patches are your patches but moving to TI_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES. And the final patch would be adding your new ti-initrd-image into MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RRECOMMENDS list for all platforms. >>>>> >>>>> Noted. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Moteen >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Did I miss anything, Denys? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 9/8/2025 5:53 AM, Moteen Shah wrote: >>>>>>> Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used >>>>>>> for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package >>>>>>> boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by >>>>>>> initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ >>>>>>> .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>> 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) >>>>>>> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>>>> create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>>>> index 00000000..8847cb2e >>>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb >>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ >>>>>>> +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" >>>>>>> diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>>>> new file mode 100644 >>>>>>> index 00000000..f6b99073 >>>>>>> --- /dev/null >>>>>>> +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb >>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ >>>>>>> +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ >>>>>>> + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ >>>>>>> + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ >>>>>>> +" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +LICENSE = "MIT" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +inherit core-image >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ >>>>>>> + initramfs-framework-base \ >>>>>>> + initramfs-module-udev \ >>>>>>> + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ >>>>>>> +" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +MODULES = "\ >>>>>>> + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ >>>>>>> + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ >>>>>>> + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ >>>>>>> +" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +UTILS = "\ >>>>>>> + cifs-utils \ >>>>>>> + nfs-utils \ >>>>>>> + nfs-utils-client \ >>>>>>> +" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ >>>>>>> + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ >>>>>>> + ${UTILS} \ >>>>>>> + ${MODULES} \ >>>>>>> + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ >>>>>>> +" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" >>>>>>> + >>>>>>> +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot directory from >>>>>>> +# the final image this is usually done by adding RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" >>>>>>> +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this method. Instead we >>>>>>> +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. >>>>>>> +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " >>>>>>> +empty_boot_dir () { >>>>>>> + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* >>>>>>> +} >>>>>> >>>> >> >> >> >> > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > View/Reply Online (#19030): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/19030 > Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/115128108/3619733 > Group Owner: meta-ti+owner@lists.yoctoproject.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/unsub [afd@ti.com] > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >
diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb new file mode 100644 index 00000000..8847cb2e --- /dev/null +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ +SUMMARY = "Minimal initrd for boot requirements" + +require recipes-core/packagegroups/packagegroup-core-boot.bb + +RDEPENDS:${PN}:remove = "grub-efi kernel" diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb new file mode 100644 index 00000000..f6b99073 --- /dev/null +++ b/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ +SUMMARY = "TI SDK minimal initrd image" + +DESCRIPTION = "Image meant to probe boot essential modules\ + and other modules to reach the userspace, which cannot be\ + built inside the upstream linux kernel image.\ +" + +LICENSE = "MIT" + +inherit core-image + +IMAGE_NAME = "initrd" + +IMAGE_NAME_SUFFIX = "" + +IMAGE_FEATURES:remove = "package-management" + +INITRAMFS_FSTYPES = "cpio cpio.xz" + +IMAGE_FSTYPES = "${INITRAMFS_FSTYPES}" + +INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS ?= "\ + initramfs-framework-base \ + initramfs-module-udev \ + initramfs-module-nfsrootfs \ +" + +MODULES = "\ + kernel-module-cdns-pltfrm \ + kernel-module-ti-j721e-ufs \ + kernel-module-tps6594-i2c \ +" + +UTILS = "\ + cifs-utils \ + nfs-utils \ + nfs-utils-client \ +" + +PACKAGE_INSTALL = "\ + ${INITRAMFS_SCRIPTS} \ + ${UTILS} \ + ${MODULES} \ + packagegroup-ti-initrd \ +" + +export IMAGE_BASENAME = "ti-initrd-image" + +# To further reduce the size of the rootfs, remove the /boot directory from +# the final image this is usually done by adding RDEPENDS_kernel-base = "" +# in the configuration file. In our case we can't use this method. Instead we +# just wipe out the content of "/boot" before creating the image. +ROOTFS_POSTPROCESS_COMMAND += "empty_boot_dir; " +empty_boot_dir () { + rm -rf ${IMAGE_ROOTFS}/boot/* +}
Introduce a new minimal initramfs image which will be used for all K3 devices in the boot flow. The image will package boot essential and other modules which will be modprobed by initramfs-udev once the inbuilt drivers gets probed. Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah@ti.com> --- .../initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb | 5 ++ .../recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb | 56 +++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 61 insertions(+) create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/packagegroup-ti-initrd.bb create mode 100644 meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/initrd/ti-initrd-image.bb