From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S261389AbVFJXfX@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S261389AbVFJXfX (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Fri, 10 Jun 2005 19:35:23 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261399AbVFJXfW
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 10 Jun 2005 19:35:22 -0400
Received: from fsmlabs.com ([168.103.115.128]:1173 "EHLO fsmlabs.com")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261389AbVFJXeB (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 10 Jun 2005 19:34:01 -0400
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 17:36:10 -0600 (MDT)
From: Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Bill Huey <bhuey@lnxw.com>
cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>, Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
       Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>, Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, karim@opersys.com,
       mingo@elte.hu, pmarques@grupopie.com, bruce@andrew.cmu.edu,
       nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, ak@muc.de, sdietrich@mvista.com,
       dwalker@mvista.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org
Subject: Re: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread
In-Reply-To: <20050610232628.GA23512@nietzsche.lynx.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0506101735290.19405@montezuma.fsmlabs.com>
References: <20050608022646.GA3158@us.ibm.com> <42A8D1F3.8070408@am.sony.com>
 <20050609235026.GE1297@us.ibm.com> <1118372388.32270.6.camel@mindpipe>
 <20050610154745.GA1300@us.ibm.com> <20050610173728.GA6564@g5.random>
 <1118436338.6423.48.camel@mindpipe> <20050610231647.GK1300@us.ibm.com>
 <20050610232628.GA23512@nietzsche.lynx.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Bill Huey wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 10, 2005 at 04:16:47PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Sounds like I need to add "antisocial hardware" to the list of
> > things that need to be inspected to validate realtime latencies.
> 
> And anti-social memory controllers (cough G5 Macs)

What's wrong with the memory controller on the G5?