Skip to content

Add SPI slave mode support #2050

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Add SPI slave mode support #2050

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

patricklaf
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

This PR implements SPI slave mode for the SPI library.

There is an existing PR, #1612, but it is not actively developped and it uses HAL and LL functions from user code.

How to use

There is no change to the API for master mode. Existing code should just work without any change.

This is an exemple of a slave device:

volatile bool rx = false;

void SPI_ISR() {
  rx = true;
}

void setup() {
   // Add SPI_SLAVE to begin function
  SPI.begin(SS, SPI_SLAVE);
  // Add an ISR to the SS pin to detect device selection by SPI master
  SPI.attachSlaveInterrupt(SS, SPI_ISR); 
}

void loop() {
  if (rx) {
    // Use the various SPI.transfer() functions to read and write data
    rx = false;
  }
}

Limitation

  • The read and write operations of the slave must be as fast as possible or data will be lost.

  • An SPI device is only slave or master. begin() and end() can be called with different device mode to allow role switch.

@fpistm fpistm self-requested a review August 30, 2023 15:09
@fpistm fpistm added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 30, 2023
@fpistm fpistm mentioned this pull request Nov 28, 2023
Closed
@fpistm
feat(spi): add slave mode support
78e0808 
Signed-off-by: patricklaf <patrick.lafarguette@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Frederic Pillon <frederic.pillon@st.com>
@fpistm
Copy link
Member

fpistm commented Dec 6, 2023

Hi @patricklaf
I've rebased and reworked your PR to match latest SPI changes.
I guess, It would be fine to add examples.

@fpistm fpistm marked this pull request as draft March 11, 2024 14:33
@AlejandroHuerta
Copy link

AlejandroHuerta commented Jul 26, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Has been PR been forgotten? It would be helpful to have this feature and not need to modify the local source code.

Edit: After looking a bit deeper into this PR, it looks like the implementation is incomplete.

@fpistm
Copy link
Member

fpistm commented Jul 28, 2025

No. Just no time on my side to deeper check that.
Any help will be appreciated. It is a community project. 😉

@AlejandroHuerta
Copy link

It's a bit over my head atm but I have looked into it a bit. Just need more free time.

@philrittenhouse
Copy link

@patricklaf Thank you for writing this! I've been testing it out and it seems to work well if the slave knows how many bytes to expect from the master. In my use case it can vary, but AFAICT the spi.transfer() functions need a fixed length.

Am I missing something? If not, I'm thinking of adding a helper function spi_com.c that reads a variable amount of data until the CS goes high. Let me know if you see any issue with this approach

@patricklaf
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @philrittenhouse ,
I am not currently using SPI slave feature. I think that @fpistm can give you a better answer to your proposal of introducing a new function.

@fpistm
Copy link
Member

fpistm commented Aug 18, 2025

@philrittenhouse
feel free to provide an update to this PR.
Any contribution is welcome.

@philrittenhouse
Copy link

@philrittenhouse feel free to provide an update to this PR. Any contribution is welcome.

Thanks @fpistm. The additions I ended up making were fairly significant so a separate PR may be more appropriate. I would like to see this PR get merged in though, as I think it is a good first step and provides a good baseline level of functionality. Is there anything I can do to help move that process along?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@fpistm fpistm Awaiting requested review from fpistm

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
STM32 core based on ST HAL
Status: In progress
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@patricklaf @fpistm @AlejandroHuerta @philrittenhouse