Re: [yocto] [RFC] Moving OP-TEE support from meta-arm to oe-core

On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 9:05 AM Ross Burton via lists.yoctoproject.org
<[email protected]> wrote:

> On 22 Jan 2026, at 09:33, Thomas Perrot via lists.yoctoproject.org
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Currently, OP-TEE support is maintained in the meta-arm layer. However,
> > OP-TEE is now being adopted by non-ARM platforms as well, notably RISC-
> > V.
> >
> > Given this broader adoption, would it make sense to move the OP-TEE
> > recipes from meta-arm to oe-core?
> >
> > I'd like to hear the community's thoughts on this.
>
> Copying in the meta-arm list.
>
> My immediate thought on this is “would the riscv machines actually use the
> same recipes” or is there enough forking and vendor branches happening that
> whilst in theory everyone is using OP-TEE, they’re not all using the _same_
> optee.
>
> I’m not against moving genuinely shared recipes somewhere common, but I do
> think verifying this will actually happen is important.
>
> meta-arm tends to have several versions of optee at once for good reason…
> (currently one, but about to be two)
>
>
I think its a good idea, but Ross's point is good too. If optee is forked
for every architecture that can not be a good thing. However, if we can get
qemuarm64 and qemuriscv64 based machines use an upstream version reliably,
we might be able to even help upstream to keep things sane
atleast for emulated machine architecture, similar to u-boot.


> Ross
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
> You automatically follow any topics you start or reply to.
> View/Reply Online (#66179):
> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/66179
> Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/117397331/1997914
> Group Owner: [email protected]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [
> [email protected]]
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>