Instead of using hypercall passing parameter to identify hwp driver,
we shall use hwp_active(). Also, we've already used hwp_active() in
do_get_pm_info() in the same file to do hwp driver check, it's
better syncing with same way.
Signed-off-by: Penny Zheng <penny.zh...@amd.com>
---
v4 -> v5:
- new commit
---
xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c b/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c
index 514475cf5c..c09e001ec3 100644
--- a/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c
@@ -253,9 +253,7 @@ static int get_cpufreq_para(struct xen_sysctl_pm_op *op)
else
strlcpy(op->u.get_para.scaling_driver, "Unknown", CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN);
- if ( IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEL) &&
- !strncmp(op->u.get_para.scaling_driver, XEN_HWP_DRIVER_NAME,
- CPUFREQ_NAME_LEN) )
+ if ( hwp_active() )
ret = get_hwp_para(policy->cpu, &op->u.get_para.u.cppc_para);
else
{
--
2.34.1
