Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/bugs: Add SRSO_USER_KERNEL_NO support

[Josh Poimboeuf]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 04:37:10PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Also it doesn't really make sense to add a printk here as the mitigation
> > will be printed at the end of the function.
> 
> This is us letting the user know that we don't need Safe-RET anymore and we're
> falling back. But I'm not that hung up on that printk...

The printk makes sense when it's actually a fallback from
"spec_rstack_overflow=safe-ret", but if nothing was specified on the
cmdline, it's the default rather than a fallback.  In which case I think
the printk would be confusing.

-- 
Josh