[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: bcm63xx UDC driver

Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: bcm63xx UDC driver
From: Kevin Cernekee <>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 20:48:11 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=K5sASiuD44ziwI27xi8S/q2FwzrVfGSWiNtfHDHgaBI=; b=U0fqbO5lTYcBH4Ac4ypktJLlAL0BdeZ7VnymTnsh6ZW5ogE1WMMRbZEx6JqcS047gw psTZdUgLAeE7YfuVGROCpy2wsyPBsRBbTgFZRxURQkdpst6YRaWMaEcmzFU5xR81LHSH fdJvjL03hQxclEW3rg2wjuyCBeOuG0yLcZIK+o9+JY8YY034HyAR5BmLZdP2vh1O5GEV wWV3wsL95YxiI+D5EAME42UKaB3npsyZcLvhknUzwdB2aCLeWL71WzK3tpIe4+wjeC0v Az1J5V2qN0WJAvvM12Ooa4HTLbNlnzXKHxy7wFAL5UP9d27ekzKobAvpMSCmh8fOC8IJ PDIA==
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <>
List-help: <>
List-id: linux-mips <>
List-owner: <>
List-post: <>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <>
List-unsubscribe: <>
References: <97cb21b8063a02a9664baf8b749ae200@localhost> <>
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Felipe Balbi <> wrote:
> no workqueues, please either handle the IRQ here or use threaded_irqs.
> again, no workqueues.


I am seeing all sorts of deadlocks now, after removing the workqueue
(patch V2).  Some have easy fixes, but for others it is not as
obvious.  The code was much simpler when I could just trigger a
deferred worker function.

Workqueues are used in at91_udc, lpc32xx_udc, mv_udc_core, and
pch_udc.  Could you please clarify why it is not OK to use one in


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>