Re: [PATCH V2] soundwire: qcom: use signed variable for error return

On Wed 31 Mar 10:55 CDT 2021, Vinod Koul wrote: > We get warning of using a unsigned variable being compared to less than > zero. The comparison is correct as it checks for errors from previous > call to qcom_swrm_get_alert_slave_dev_num(), so we should use a signed > variable here. > > While at

Re: [PATCH V2] soundwire: qcom: use signed variable for error return

On 3/31/21 10:55 AM, Vinod Koul wrote: We get warning of using a unsigned variable being compared to less than zero. The comparison is correct as it checks for errors from previous call to qcom_swrm_get_alert_slave_dev_num(), so we should use a signed variable here. While at it, drop the supe

[PATCH V2] soundwire: qcom: use signed variable for error return

We get warning of using a unsigned variable being compared to less than zero. The comparison is correct as it checks for errors from previous call to qcom_swrm_get_alert_slave_dev_num(), so we should use a signed variable here. While at it, drop the superfluous initialization as well drivers/soun