[U-Boot] mxsboot vs. imximage (was: Re: [PATCH 4/8] mxsboot: stop referring to i.MX28 as this ought to work for all i.MXS SoCs)

[Marek Vasut]

Dear Dirk Behme,

> Hi Marek,
> 
> On 30.05.2012 07:49, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Wolfgang Denk,
> > 
> >> Dear Otavio Salvador,
> >> 
> >> In message<1336866018-614-5-git-send-email-otavio at ossystems.com.br>  you
> > 
> > wrote:
> >>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador<otavio at 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.
> 
> I wasn't aware of mxsboot before this thread, so I start looking at
> it. I'm no expert of mx28 nor how the boot ROMs handle the NAND.
> Therefore some comments and questions:
> 
> Looking at
> 
> http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=tools/mxsboot.c;h=6c05aa479d4360c
> 0c14cd0f989c250ecf119126d;hb=HEAD#l453
> 
> mxsboot seem to support NAND and SD. Looking at the options given
> there, yes it sounds like a good idea to move that to imximage.

100%

> One question regarding the NAND handling, though:
> 
> Is mxsboot assumed to replace the Freescale tool 'kobs-ng'

I believe so. It generates the necessary NAND headers for NAND boot. You can 
then write the resulting image directly at the begining of the NAND.

> http://imxcommunity.org/forum/topics/i-mx6-nand-boot?commentId=4103961%3ACo
> mment%3A69314&xg_source=activity
> 
> ?
> 
> It was my understanding that for the NAND the bad sector table is
> necessary to be able to write a bootable image to the NAND? And this
> can be done only on the target?

You mean DBBT? From what I remember, the bad block handling is done with the BCH 
module and the first block is always OK anyway. Or it was somehow like that,  
but I might be wrong. The point is, mxsboot doesn't use DBBT.

> While mxsboot runs on the host? So
> it's not sufficient to give mxsboot the page/OOB/erase size options
> because the bad sector table is individual for each board/NAND chip?

I don't see why the bad sector table is needed at all as the BCH handles the 
ECC.

> Best regards
> 
> Dirk

Best regards,
Marek Vasut