Re: [PATCH 1/2] usb: gadget: r8a66597: Fix two possible sleep-in-atomic-context bugs in init_controller()

[Felipe Balbi]

Hi,

Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@xxxxxxx> writes:
>>> And as bonus question, why is it better to have mdelay() calls in the driver ?
>>
>> As a bugfix, it's the smallest fix possible, right? Ideally, we wouldn't
>> need either of them. Perhaps there's a bit which can be polled instead?
> Ideally yes. Do you remember if a "threaded interrupt" might use msleep() ? I
> seem to remember that they can, so won't that be another alternative ?

yeah, unless, of course, you have a spinlock held. ;-)

-- 
balbi