Hi, many of you probably know that I'm trying to remove pcim_iomap_regions() from the kernel. One of the more difficult users is ATA, because it's the only subsystem I've seen so far that accesses that table pcim_iomap_table() administrates. This series only builds as a whole because of patch 1. That's why I submit it as an RFC. I want to know whether you agree with the basic idea, and whether your subsystem wants this series to be squashed into a single commit that builds. Another solution would be to provide a struct ata_host.iomap2 or something like that, phase out the pcim_iomap_regions() users, and then remove iomap2 again. Please tell me your preferred way. (This is the revived version of an old series from August. In case someone is wondering) Thx, P. Philipp Stanner (3): ata: Allocate PCI iomap table statically ata: Replace deprecated PCI functions libata-sff: Simplify request of PCI resources drivers/ata/ata_piix.c | 7 +- drivers/ata/libata-sff.c | 130 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------- drivers/ata/pata_atp867x.c | 13 ++-- drivers/ata/pata_hpt3x3.c | 10 +-- drivers/ata/pata_ninja32.c | 11 +-- drivers/ata/pata_pdc2027x.c | 11 ++- drivers/ata/pata_sil680.c | 12 ++-- drivers/ata/pdc_adma.c | 9 ++- drivers/ata/sata_inic162x.c | 10 ++- drivers/ata/sata_mv.c | 9 +-- drivers/ata/sata_nv.c | 8 +-- drivers/ata/sata_promise.c | 8 ++- drivers/ata/sata_qstor.c | 7 +- drivers/ata/sata_sil.c | 8 ++- drivers/ata/sata_sil24.c | 20 +++--- drivers/ata/sata_sis.c | 8 +-- drivers/ata/sata_svw.c | 10 +-- drivers/ata/sata_sx4.c | 19 +++++- drivers/ata/sata_via.c | 31 +++++---- drivers/ata/sata_vsc.c | 8 ++- include/linux/libata.h | 7 +- 21 files changed, 216 insertions(+), 140 deletions(-) -- 2.47.0
