fix: perimgr + begin

[SuGlider]

---

Description of Change

Follows #9327 for Arduino Core 3.0.0

Fixes (#9316) where ESP may not respond over the USB Serial/JTAG interface if bytes are sent before HWCDC::begin(...) is called. Clearing of the interrupt status has been removed from HWCDC::begin(...) so that if the USB_SERIAL_JTAG_INTR_SERIAL_OUT_RECV_PKT is already set, the isr handler can process the interrupt status correctly.

Additional Fixes:
Fixes Perimgr setup in begin()
Fixes issue with reset INTR mask preventing previous sent data to be read.
Adds a INTR mask to end() to clear all pending interrupts.

Tests scenarios

ESP32-S3, C3, C6, H2.
Start the sketch, send some data using the Serial Monitor before seen the message "Started!".
These data shall be read and written back to the Serial Monitor.
The failure is that it is not read/written. PR fixes it and also adjust the PeriMan code.

void setup() {
  
  delay(5000);

  HWCDCSerial.begin();
  while(!HWCDCSerial) delay(10);
  
  HWCDCSerial.println("Started!");
  while(HWCDCSerial.available()) HWCDCSerial.write(HWCDCSerial.read());
}

void loop(){}

Related links

Reference #9316 #9327

[github-actions]

	Warnings
⚠️	Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR: the commit message "Update HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Update cores/esp32/HWCDC.cpp": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "fix: perimgr + begin": summary looks too short Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips: follow Conventional Commits style correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 20 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers) TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).
⚠️	Please consider squashing your 16 commits (simplifying branch history).
⚠️	The source branch "SuGlider-patch-1" incorrect format: contains uppercase letters. This can cause troubles on case-insensitive file systems (macOS). Please rename your branch.

👋 Hello SuGlider, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

---

Click to see more instructions ...

This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...

We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests.

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
4. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against d174275