On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Add an example SPI slave handler responding with the uptime at the time > of reception of the last SPI message. > > This can be used by an external microcontroller as a dead man's switch. > +static int spi_slave_time_submit(struct spi_slave_time_priv *priv) > +{ > + u32 rem_ns; > + int ret; > + u64 ts; > + > + ts = local_clock(); > + rem_ns = do_div(ts, 1000000000) / 1000; You divide ts by 10^9, which makes it seconds if it was nanoseconds. But reminder is still in nanoseconds and you divide it by 10^3. If I didn't miss anything it should be called like rem_ns -> reminder_ms > + > + priv->buf[0] = cpu_to_be32(ts); > + priv->buf[1] = cpu_to_be32(rem_ns); > + > + spi_message_init_with_transfers(&priv->msg, &priv->xfer, 1); > + > + priv->msg.complete = spi_slave_time_complete; > + priv->msg.context = priv; > + > + ret = spi_async(priv->spi, &priv->msg); > + if (ret) > + pr_err("%s: spi_async() failed %d\n", __func__, ret); Perhaps dev_err() ? > + > + return ret; > +} > +static int spi_slave_time_probe(struct spi_device *spi) > +{ > + struct spi_slave_time_priv *priv; > + int ret; > + > + /* > + * bits_per_word cannot be configured in platform data > + */ > + spi->bits_per_word = 8; Is it worth to define it? If so, can we use device properties for that? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html