For any burst transfer Master has to pass only first address, for the consecutive transfer address calculation is taken care by Slave. So i want to know what is the basic difference in FIXED and INCR burst transfer?
Hello Chandan,
I think you are basically correct.I'm interested in the sentences of "Also for ARSIZE equal to bus width I feel there would be no difference from slave side also".The information which a slave can get will be the same but the interpretation of it will be implementation dependent.If the slave is a memory device such as SRAM, FIXED and INCR behavior should differ.Of course, in the case of AxLEN=0 (i.e. 1 burst), they are completely the same.
Best regards,Yasuhiko Koumoto.
If a slave would act as FIFOs, you are right.
If you are the slave designer, you can interpret the AxBURST according to your convenience.
Best regards,
Yasuhiko Koumoto.
Thanks a lot Koumoto-san.
Regards,
Chandan
Hi Koumoto-san,
Thanks a lot for your kind reply.
By "Also for ARSIZE equal to bus width I feel there would be no difference from slave side also" I was meaning about the activity
seen on bus from slave side only.
Just for the sake of completion I would like to know how the implementation would differ in slave.
For INCR slave would get the starting address=0x0, for AxSIZE=4, 4 bytes of write data on the bus
and store the 4 transfers for AxLENGTH=4 by incrementing internal address to 0x4,0x8 and 0xC
and for FIXED it would store these transfer like a FIFO( for FIXED is supposed to be used for slaves like FIFOs)
But all the 4 transfers would be stored in slave for FIXED transfer also and not be overwritten.
Kindly let me know.