Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify HAL usage #9

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Clarify HAL usage #9

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

Zelzahn
Copy link
Collaborator

@Zelzahn Zelzahn commented Apr 17, 2024

Currently, the wording around embedded-hal can be interpreted as such that this library is necessary for an implementation. This is not the case, and thus this phrase is rewritten.

In the non-goals, a paragraph is added around behaviour not specified in this proposal. The intent behind this paragraph is to only populate the specification with behaviour with clear interest from the industry.

@jschilli
Copy link
Contributor

lgtm. Thx for clarifying

@@ -30,6 +34,8 @@ The primary goal is to provide an interface that WASI programs can use to read a

Although I2C is in some aspects not that different from SPI, the purpose of this proposal is to solely focus on I2C.

Currently, behaviour that is not specified by this API is seen as undefined and, unless there's sufficient interest, is regarded as out-of-scope.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you expand on what kind of behavior this is meant to cover?

My thought is, we don't need to specify the full semantics of the I2C protocol in WASI; we just need to specify how the WASI APIs map to I2C operations. With that understanding, it seems like a lot of places where there's ambiguity in terms of what the exact behavior is can be left to the I2C standards to figure out.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants