On 3/19/2026 9:55 AM, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 08:59:24AM -0500, Ryan Eatmon via
lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
On 3/19/2026 5:35 AM, Shiva Tripathi wrote:
Register dynamic-layers/security in layer.conf with BBFILES_DYNAMIC
for both 'security' and 'tpm-layer' collections to conditionally
build LUKS encryption support when meta-security/meta-tpm layers
are present.
Add meta-security to LAYERRECOMMENDS to document the optional
dependency for LUKS functionality.
Update ti-core-initramfs.inc to auto-enable initramfs generation
when DISTRO_FEATURES contains 'luks'.
Signed-off-by: Shiva Tripathi <[email protected]>
---
meta-ti-bsp/conf/layer.conf | 5 +++++
meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/ti-core-initramfs.inc | 2 +-
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/layer.conf b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/layer.conf
index f78da573..36d05b5a 100644
--- a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/layer.conf
+++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/layer.conf
@@ -20,10 +20,15 @@ LAYERDEPENDS_meta-ti-bsp = " \
LAYERRECOMMENDS_meta-ti-bsp = " \
openembedded-layer \
+ meta-security \
"
The layer should be same as below: security and tpm-layer I was
just using meta-security as a placeholder.
Yeah, it's quite unfortunate that layer's collection name could be different
from layer's directory name. Some maintainers keep them the same (e.g.
meta-ti-bsp), but some make them different (e.g. meta-security -> security
and meta-tpm -> tpm-layer). It could be rather confusing...
BBFILES_DYNAMIC += " \
openembedded-layer:${LAYERDIR}/dynamic-layers/openembedded-layer/recipes*/*/*.bbappend
\
+ security:${LAYERDIR}/dynamic-layers/security/recipes*/*/*.bb \
+ security:${LAYERDIR}/dynamic-layers/security/recipes*/*/*.bbappend \
+ tpm-layer:${LAYERDIR}/dynamic-layers/security/recipes*/*/*.bb \
+ tpm-layer:${LAYERDIR}/dynamic-layers/security/recipes*/*/*.bbappend \
Moreover - is there really a need to set up security top level layer here? If
only TPM tools are needed, then just tpm-layer should be enough, even when it
comes from within meta-security git repository.
E.g., we set up openembedded-layer here, but that's not meta-openembedded top
level, but instead meta-oe sub-layer inside meta-openembedded. There are
sub-layers in there, which are not needed for meta-ti-bsp dependency. Same
thought goes to tpm-layer.
Then we would only be including the tpm-layer in the layer setup, so we
should change the dynamic layer name to match in the second patch.
"
SIGGEN_EXCLUDERECIPES_ABISAFE += " \
diff --git a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/ti-core-initramfs.inc
b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/ti-core-initramfs.inc
index 9d3cc612..15c05e04 100644
--- a/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/ti-core-initramfs.inc
+++ b/meta-ti-bsp/conf/machine/include/ti-core-initramfs.inc
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
# TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_ENABLED = "0"
#
#------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_ENABLED ?= "${@ '1' if
d.getVar('TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES') or
d.getVar('TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_EXTRA_INSTALL') else '0'}"
+TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_ENABLED ?= "${@ '1' if
d.getVar('TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES') or
d.getVar('TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_EXTRA_INSTALL') or bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES',
'luks', True, False, d) else '0'}"
TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_KERNEL_MODULES ?= ""
TI_CORE_INITRAMFS_EXTRA_INSTALL ?= ""
--
Ryan Eatmon [email protected]
-----------------------------------------
Texas Instruments, Inc. - LCPD - MGTS
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#19780):
https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/message/19780
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/118397821/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-ti/unsub
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
