svn commit: r314186 - head/sys/arm/at91

[Ian Lepore]

On Thu, 2017-02-23 at 23:48 +0000, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:
> Author: pfg
> Date: Thu Feb 23 23:48:44 2017
> New Revision: 314186
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/314186
> 
> Log:
>   at91: double assignment.
>   
>   Found with:	coccinelle (da.cocci)
>   Suggested by:	cognet
> 
> Modified:
>   head/sys/arm/at91/at91sam9260.c
> 
> Modified: head/sys/arm/at91/at91sam9260.c
> =====================================================================
> =========
> --- head/sys/arm/at91/at91sam9260.c	Thu Feb 23 22:46:01 2017	
> (r314185)
> +++ head/sys/arm/at91/at91sam9260.c	Thu Feb 23 23:48:44 2017	
> (r314186)
> @@ -193,7 +193,6 @@ at91_clock_init(void)
>  	 */
>  	clk = at91_pmc_clock_ref("pllb");
>  	clk->pll_min_in    = SAM9260_PLL_B_MIN_IN_FREQ;		
> /*   1 MHz */
> -	clk->pll_max_in    = SAM9260_PLL_B_MAX_IN_FREQ;		
> /*   5 MHz */
>  	clk->pll_max_in    = 2999999;				
> /*  ~3 MHz */
>  	clk->pll_min_out   = SAM9260_PLL_B_MIN_OUT_FREQ;	/*  
> 70 MHz */
>  	clk->pll_max_out   = SAM9260_PLL_B_MAX_OUT_FREQ;	/*
> 130 MHz */
> 

Just looking at this by eye (but without digging out the at91 manuals)
I'd say this looks like fallout from a mismerge and the correct line to
keep would be the named constant.  Keeping the one that has actually
been in effect all this time isn't the same as keeping the right one,
and this deletion may remove the only clue someone might find when they
eventually get around to debugging this (if ever, the sam9260 is a
pretty old chip).

-- ian