On Wed, 2024-09-11 at 14:25 +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
> > +static void vt_flush_tlb_all(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > +{
> > + /*
> > + * TDX calls tdx_track() in tdx_sept_remove_private_spte() to ensure
> > + * private EPT will be flushed on the next TD enter.
> > + * No need to call tdx_track() here again even when this callback is
> > as
> > + * a result of zapping private EPT.
> > + * Just invoke invept() directly here to work for both shared EPT
> > and
> > + * private EPT.
>
> IIUC, private EPT is already flushed in .remove_private_spte(), so in
> theory we don't have to invept() for private EPT?
I think you are talking about the comment, and not an optimization. So changing:
"Just invoke invept() directly here to work for both shared EPT and private EPT"
to just "Just invoke invept() directly here to work for shared EPT".
Seems good to me.
