[meta-intel] meta-intel.inc: Update INTRD to INITRD_LIVE

[Robert Yang]

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?
>