Re: [RFC][PATCH 06/17] x86/cpu: Add SRSO untrain to retbleed=

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 12:10:03PM -0400, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 05:44:04PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 09:12:24AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Since it is now readily apparent that the two SRSO
> > > untrain_ret+return_thunk variants are exactly the same mechanism as
> > > the existing (retbleed) zen untrain_ret+return_thunk, add them to the
> > > existing retbleed options.
> > 
> > Except that Zen3/4 are not affected by retbleed, according to my current
> > state of information.
> > 
> > I don't like this lumping together of the issues even if their
> > mitigations are more or less similar.
> 
> I tend to agree that SRSO is a new issue and should have its own sysfs
> and cmdline options (though a separate CONFIG option is overkill IMO).
> 
> The mitigations are unfortunately intertwined, but we've been in that
> situation several times before (e.g., spectre_v2 + intel retbleed).

That very experience wants me to avoid doing it again :-/ But you all
really want to keep the parameter, can we at least rename it something
you can remember how to type, like 'srso=' instead of this horrific
'spec_rstack_overflow=' thing?