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

[Marek Vasut]

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.

> 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