I was wondering what is the process for creating new products and what to call them. In short, who comes up with these names?
For instance, there are a few Intel CPUs called Baytrail - Celerons for Desktops and Tablets, Atoms for Embedded. They are both represented now in the coreboot source tree. The Celeron Baytrail-T seems to have been provided by Google for their Rambi Chromebook. The sources have gone in src/soc/intel/baytrail.
OK, that seems fair. But it isn't for the Baytrail-I processor (from the ISG division of Intel). Just recently Sage has committed code for Baytrail-I as src/soc/intel/fsp_baytrail. I find this very unwieldy and lacking clarity in naming conventions.
1) In no way is it clear from the names that src/soc/intel/baytrail is for "D,M,T" versions of the CPU. 2) In no way is it clear from the names that src/soc/intel/fsp_baytrail is for "I" versions. 3) Why in the world is fsp_ added to the name like that? FSP support should be somewhat generic in nature and IMHO doesn't need to be spelled out like that. 4) There is a lot of copied code from src/soc/intel/baytrail to src/soc/intel/fsp_baytrail. Some integration would by nice.
It would be great if some person or committee were to help clarify and make naming conventions a little easier to understand.
By the way, I have a fully functional version working on Baytrail-I as well and I put it in my tree as src/soc/intel/baytrail-isg. Works great for Bakersport and BayleyBay CRBs. It was my intention to contribute this at some point, but I doubt now it will get accepted even if better and more complete.
Cheers, Sean