revert(PeriphDrivers): Revert incorrect spi_num - reqselTx/Rx matching in DMA-based SPI transactions for MAX32655, MAX32662, MAX32680, MAX78000, and MAX78002

[JeonChangmin]

Description

This pull request reverts the commit that attempted to fix the spi_num and reqselTx/Rx matching in DMA-based SPI transactions. The previous fix was incorrect due to a misunderstanding of the RISC-V architecture implementation.

Reason for Reversion

Upon reviewing the max78000.h file, it was noted that the spi_num and mxc_dma_reqsel_t numbers were intentionally ordered to support both ARM and RISC-V architectures. The mismatched numbers were due to this architectural difference, not an error in the original implementation. By reverting this commit, we restore the original, correct behavior for both architectures. (See max78000.h comment)

Additional Information

• This reversion addresses issues introduced in fix(PeriphDrivers): Resolve incorrect DMA request in DMA-based SPI transactions for all parts #1059.
• The changes were made while handling comments and were not tested specifically for this scenario. I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

Tests

• Tested the changes on a MAX78000 device to ensure correct behavior of the DMA-based SPI transactions.

Checklist Before Requesting Review

• PR Title follows correct guidelines.
• Description of changes and all other relevant information.
• Provide info on any relevant functional testing/validation. For API changes or significant features, this is not optional.

[sihyung-maxim]

No worries, not your fault. The indexing and names are confusing which should be addressed. Plus, I think my comment was hidden away.

#1059 (comment)

[JeonChangmin]

@sihyung-maxim Thank you for your message.

Your previous comment might have been missed due to the resolved conversation.
In this PR, I have included a revert commit to address the mismatch issue from the earlier PR.
Since I might not fully grasp all the device scenarios, it would be great if you could discuss and decide on the best approach internally.

Thank you for your understanding.

[sihyung-maxim]

Will handle the confusing indexing issues in a separate PR. It's finally time to address these changes.