Rework AMDS daisy chain implementation

[AwesomeTornado]

Closes #139, #803
@elsevers

Notes

This update:

• Disables interrupts during sampling and transmission
• Removes try process routing
• Removes dual stream fast path from drv_uart.c
• Removes single stream fast path from drv_uart.c
• Refactors the uart slow path to eliminate while loops

During tests, the FBC board was about 1us faster, while the AMDS was about 4us faster.
I have not yet collected data to prove this, this is based off of what I saw during testing.

DMA seems to be done within interrupts, so I am unsure as to why it still works while they are disabled. Regardless, doing so has made data transmission faster and more consistent.

Testing was done on FBC and AMDS daisy chain setups, with the following screenshot showing @knvprasad-dr's setup working with this new firmware.

Testing was done with three daisy chained AMDS boards, and the AMDC counters showed no bad data.

Self-Review

1. Are all images < 40 kB and other files < 300 kB (if not, please carefully assess whether it is worth committing them)? Yes
2. Are all files named according to the appropriate naming convention, i.e., dash-case, camelCase, snake case? Yes
3. Do all Markdown files follow the CONTRIBUTING article template? Yes
4. Do all links work in the material that the PR is adding? Yes
5. Is the PR configured to close the correct issue(s)? Yes
6. Did the PR fully address the Approach section of the issue(s) it is closing? Yes

Reviewer Instructions

Reviewers, please copy and paste a suitable review checklist into your review and answer all questions.

Appendix

This section should be the same for all PRs. Do not edit this section when creating a PR.

Review Checklists

Checklists maintained by the eLev lab for research repositories include:

• Report checklist
• Publication archive checklist (select a checklist from the Approach that corresponds to the step this PR seeks to complete).
• Standard checklist (if none of the above apply).

Standard checklist

1. Are all images < 40 kB and other files < 300 kB (if not, please carefully assess whether it is worth committing them)? **Yes or No**
2. Are all files named according to the appropriate [naming convention](https://github.com/Severson-Group/research-repo-template?tab=readme-ov-file#file-naming), i.e., dash-case, camelCase, snake case? **Yes or No**
3. Do all Markdown files follow the [CONTRIBUTING article template](https://github.com/Severson-Group/.github/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#markdown-documentation-template)? **Yes or No**
4. Do all links work in the material that the PR is adding? **Yes or No**
5. Is the PR configured to close the correct issue(s)? **Yes or No**
6. Did the PR fully address the `Approach` section of the issue(s) it is closing? **Yes or No**

Please work on addressing any **No** items.

[elsevers]

Thanks @AwesomeTornado! Is this ready for review + release, or still in draft stage?

[AwesomeTornado]

@elsevers This is ready for review + release.