1014: Add memory barriers to H7 flash driver to mitigate PGSERR errors r=lulf a=matoushybl
The stm32h7xx-hal uses only the ordering barrier, while the CubeMX uses the DSB and ISB instructions, to be on the safe side, both are used here.
Without the barrier, the PG bit is not set, when the writes are being done, resulting in an error.
Co-authored-by: Matous Hybl <hyblmatous@gmail.com>
1004: Fix internal channels for adc v2 r=lulf a=chemicstry
Internal channel reading was broken on adc_v2, because `Adc::read()` requires gpio pin trait, which was not implemented by `VrefInt`, `Temperature`, `Vbat`. The required configuration bits `tsvrefe`, `vbate` were not enabled either. This PR makes it a bit closer to how adc_v4 works.
While at it, I also changed adc_v2 to use `RccPeripheral` instead of permanently enabling all ADCs.
Co-authored-by: chemicstry <chemicstry@gmail.com>
992: (embassy-stm32): remove flash lock/unlock public API from stm32 flash r=lulf a=MathiasKoch
Instead, perform the unlocking and locking automatically on erase and write operations.
This makes the `embedded-storage` abstraction actually useable in libraries, while still keeping the flash peripheral locked the majority of the time.
Co-authored-by: Mathias <mk@blackbird.online>
960: Add non blocking Bxcan constructor r=Dirbaio a=andyblarblar
This PR adds a non-blocking constructor to the Bxcan Can wrapper struct. This allows for the creation of the Can periferal without blocking for a sync with the Can bus.
Co-authored-by: Andrew Ealovega <Andrew@Ealovega.dev>
839: Misc LoRaWAN improvements r=lulf a=timokroeger
Trying too get `embassy-lora` running on a [LoRa-E5 Dev Board](https://wiki.seeedstudio.com/LoRa_E5_Dev_Board/).
I can see the join message arriving in the The Things Network console but the device does not receive the accept message yet.
Opening this PR anyway because I think there are some nice things to decouple the lora crate from the nucleo board.
`@lulf` Could you test if this PR breaks your LoRa setup? Marking as draft for the time being.
Co-authored-by: Timo Kröger <timokroeger93@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ulf Lilleengen <lulf@redhat.com>
Old code used `cfg_if!` because rustc still parses code inside disabled cfg's, and Rust stable at that time couldn't parse the new GAT where-clause location. This is not the case anymore.
