Scaler II vs Scaler problems

Hi,

I can see that the dynamic addressing makes sense for "memory-mapped" peripherals where you have an area that you want to always have as a contiguous block of addresses, but for simple register-based peripherals it is a bit of a pain. The master now has to be aware of the width of the slave it is accessing in order to set the byte enables correctly.

What I might do instead is to write a simple 32-bit to 16-bit bridge and place all my 16-bit peripherals on the other side of the bridge. All registers are still alligned to the master width (32-bits) but the master does not need to set any byte enables. The bridge divides each 32-bit address by 2 for accessing going to the 16-bit side.

Thanks again!

Niki