Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: Add check for CXL Secondary Bus Reset

Dan Williams
2024-04-02T17:46:14Z

Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
[..]
> FWIW, I pinged administration@pcisig.com and got the response that
> "1E98h is not a VID in our system, but 1E98 has already been reserved
> by CXL."
>
> I wish there were a clearer public statement of this reservation, but
> I interpret the response to mean that CXL is not a "Vendor", maybe due
> to some strict definition of "Vendor," but that PCI-SIG will not
> assign 0x1e98 to any other vendor.
>
> So IMO we should add "#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_CXL 0x1e98" so that if we
> ever *do* see such an assignment, we'll be more likely to flag it as
> an issue.

Agree.