ivi-shell: Remove unnecessary check for application_surface_create()

> Didn't you already check for this condition above? Can it pass the
> earlier check and then fail here? How could this inconsistency happen?
> Or is this a paranoid check, that if we get here, there is an
> implementation bug somewhere server-side? If so, you should probably
> highlight it more, and at least make it distinguishable from the earlier check.

Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
hmi-controller: Change type of temporary variables from void *into int32_t *.

> Since it's always an uint32t anyway, might as well use 'uint32t *dest'
> here and drop a cast below.

Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
hmi-controller: Remove a unused assignment.

> Useless return. Also pp_surface = NULL; has no use.

Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
ivi-shell: Fix memory leaks by shell_destroy_shell_surface()

> I believe you are missing free(ivisurf) here. The lifetime of ivisurf is
> tied to the lifetime of the ivi_surface protocol object (wl_resource).

Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
hmi-controller: Remove unused variables as return value.

Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>
hmi-controller: Fix invalid calculation.

> 'time' is zero, so why these calculations with it?
> Something is missing here, at least you need a comment explaining what
> it is. I'd assume 'time' shouldn't be zero.
> Maybe a mistake when moving code around.

Signed-off-by: Nobuhiko Tanibata <NOBUHIKO_TANIBATA@xddp.denso.co.jp>