From: Bard Liao yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com

It seems to be a typo. It makes more sense to return the return value of sdw_update() instead of the value we want to update.

Signed-off-by: Bard Liao yung-chuan.liao@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com ---

v2: address Vinod's comment and use single return

drivers/soundwire/bus.c | 7 ++----- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/bus.c b/drivers/soundwire/bus.c index ccaa590df61e..488c3c9e4947 100644 --- a/drivers/soundwire/bus.c +++ b/drivers/soundwire/bus.c @@ -1056,13 +1056,10 @@ static int sdw_initialize_slave(struct sdw_slave *slave) val |= SDW_DP0_INT_PORT_READY | SDW_DP0_INT_BRA_FAILURE;

ret = sdw_update(slave, SDW_DP0_INTMASK, val, val); - if (ret < 0) { + if (ret < 0) dev_err(slave->bus->dev, "SDW_DP0_INTMASK read failed:%d\n", ret); - return val; - } - - return 0; + return ret; }

static int sdw_handle_dp0_interrupt(struct sdw_slave *slave, u8 *slave_status)