Re: [PATCH] x86/retpoline: Avoid return buffer underflows on context switch

[Andi Kleen]

> So pjt did alignment, a single unroll and per discussion earlier today
> (CET) or late last night (PST), he only does 16.

I used the Intel recommended sequence, which recommends 32. 

Not sure if alignment makes a difference. I can check. 

> Why is none of that done here? Also, can we pretty please stop using
> those retarded number labels, they make this stuff unreadable.

Personally I find the magic labels with strange ASCII characters 
far less readable than a simple number.

But can change it if you insist.

> Also, pause is unlikely to stop speculation, that comment doesn't make
> sense. Looking at PJT's version there used to be a speculation trap in
> there, but I can't see that here.

My understanding is that it stops speculation. But could also
use LFENCE.

-Andi