Merge spi ExclusiveDevice implementations
#477
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bugadani
changed the title
ExclusiveDevice implementations, implement async DelayUs for NoDelay
bugadani
changed the title
ExclusiveDevice implementations, implement async DelayUs for NoDelayExclusiveDevice implementations
Dirbaio
approved these changes
Jul 19, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree it makes more sense this way, yes.
My reasoning to make a separate asynch module was that we'll likely add async versions of the shared bus adapters. For those it's harder to make the same adapter implement both blocking and async (Tokio can thanks to std threads, but embassy-sync, rtic-sync can't). However there's no "standard" async mutex currently so perhaps that's best to ecosystem crates (like embassy-embedded-hal for example)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As a somewhat counter-proposal to #474 this PR merges the two different ExclusiveDevice implementations. I don't think there is any need in keeping them separate, especially when the async version implements the blocking SpiDevice trait. The separation also meant that bus access was implemented for the async version, but not the blocking-only one. This has now been fixed.