[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)

[Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@googlemail.com>]

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@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.

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=6c05aa479d4360c0c14cd0f989c250ecf119126d;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.


One question regarding the NAND handling, though:

Is mxsboot assumed to replace the Freescale tool 'kobs-ng'

http://imxcommunity.org/forum/topics/i-mx6-nand-boot?commentId=4103961%3AComment%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? 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?

Best regards

Dirk