Re: [RFC PATCH v2 03/23] x86/tdx: Enhance tdh_phymem_page_wbinvd_hkid() to invalidate huge pages

[Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>]

On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 03:37:29PM +0800, Huang, Kai wrote:
> 
> Thanks for all the explanation.
> 
> [...]
> 
> 
> > In [6], the new folio_page() implementation is
> > 
> > static inline struct page *folio_page(struct folio *folio, unsigned long n)
> > {
> > 	return &folio->page + n;
> > }
> > 
> > So, invoking folio_page() should be equal to page++ in our case.
> > 
> > [6] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20250901150359.867252-13-david@redhat.com
> 
> Sure.  But it seems you will need to wait all patches that you mentioned to
> be merged to safely use 'page++' for pages in a folio?
Correct.

> And if you do:
> 
> 	for (i = 0; i < npages; i++)
> 	{
> 		struct page *p = folio_page(folio, start_idx + i);
> 		struct tdx_module_args args = {};
> 
> 		args.rcx = mk_keyed_paddr(hkid, p);
> 		...
> 	}
> 
> It should work w/o any dependency?
> 
> Anyway, I don't have any strong opinion, as long as it works.  You may
> choose what you want. :-)
I don't have a strong opinion either. However, based on previous reviews, it
seems people prefer while (npages--) over introducing an additional variable.
I guess I'll choose a version depending on whether these patches are merged when
I post the next version. :)