From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com>
Message-ID: <m0xXb1y-0005FrC@lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk>
From: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: Pentium F00F bug Linux workaround; BSDI Response
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 23:56:37 +0000 (GMT)
In-Reply-To: <199711172323.PAA27334@dm.cobaltmicro.com> from "David S. Miller" at Nov 17, 97 03:23:46 pm
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com>
Cc: fisher@sgi.com, linux@hollywood.engr.sgi.com, fisher@hollywood.engr.sgi.com
Message-ID: <19971117235637.XkCdmvdgByzSvfsHSRVNWUcOtfOw4z2gtmyv5PehLs4@z>

> BSDI putting out their patch ahead of that point in time was, if
> anything, totally against how Intel wanted things happen.

Dave talk this off list. And if you are going to say things like
"XYZ violated their NDA" expect them to both hear about it and reply. Fair's
fair.