Dear Wolfgang Denk,
Dear Otavio Salvador,
In message 1336866018-614-5-git-send-email-otavio@ossystems.com.br you
wrote:
Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador otavio@ossystems.com.br
tools/mxsboot.c | 110 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------- 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/mxsboot.c b/tools/mxsboot.c index 6c05aa4..9661a48 100644 --- a/tools/mxsboot.c +++ b/tools/mxsboot.c @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
/*
- Freescale i.MX28 image generator
- Freescale i.MXS image generator
I'm unhappy about the name "i.MXS".
I'm unhappy about the image generator ;-)
Ok, now Otavio will probably hate me, but I believe it'd be much more helpful to convert mxsboot into part of mkimage (though this is unrelated to this patch). And maybe even better, study the generation of boot headers and compare it with mx53/mx6q ones, as mx53 ones are supported by imximage and mx28 carries direct predecessor of mx53 bootrom and then try to implement support into imximage part of mkimage.
Either we say "i.MX28" - then it's clear we mean a specific FSL SoC, identified by it's product name. Or we say "mxs" like allover the place in the Linux and U-Boot code.
Well, we can also say i.mx233/i.mx28 . MX6Q is supported by mkimage I think (see above).
But I haven't seen "i.MXS" used before, and to me it makes no sense as it mixes unrelated name spaces.
Please either use the Freescale name(s), or use "mxs".
Thanks.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
Best regards, Marek Vasut