Re: [PATCH 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Support 'reg-io-width' property for shared memory

[Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>]

On 8/12/2024 10:46 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
[snip]
>> what about these (and other) header reads if reg-io-width is defined 
>> as < 32 ?
>> Should not these accesses be size-wise too ? or I am missing smth ...
> 
> Good question, I suppose it depends whether 'reg-io-width' means that 
> this must be the strict access width we use, or if this is the minimum 
> access width supported. If the former, then yes, we do have to make a 
> whole lot of changes to support the only access width being supported, 
> if the latter, then we ought to be OK, because doing a 32-bit access 
> should drive more byte enables at the bus level, yet still return the 
> expected data.
> 
> A minimum or only supported access width of 64-bit would be quite 
> interesting, and not somewhat compatible with how SCMI is defined, so 
> maybe that one should not be supported at all, even if this is how 
> memcpy_{to,from}_io() decides to operate on parts of the memory that are 
> 8bytes aligned.

I am inclined to dropping support for doing 1 and 2 byte accesses, and 
support only 4-byte accesses, since the existing SCMI code makes use of 
io{read,write}32 in many places, unless you feel strongly about it.

1 and 2 byte accesses only do not quite make sense for a SRAM IMHO, that 
is, if you can support 1 byte, then you must support 4 byte, too.
-- 
Florian