Re: [PATCH] nvme: make firmware activation poll interval configurable

[Keith Busch]

On Thu, Jul 09, 2026 at 05:06:11PM +0800, guzebing wrote:
> The Samsung PM9D3a Gen5 SSD reports MTFA = 10, i.e. 1000 ms.
> 
> I also checked another device, an Intel/Solidigm P5520 Gen4 drive.  It
> reports MTFA = 100, i.e. 10000 ms, while the observed online activation
> time is about 800 ms.
> 
> I agree that deriving the polling interval from MTFA would be better
> than adding a module parameter.  Given that MTFA is a conservative upper
> bound rather than a good estimate of the common activation time, would
> using a small fraction of it, for example MTFA / 100 clamped to 10..100
> ms, be a reasonable policy for v2?
> 
> That would give 10 ms for the PM9D3a device above, while keeping the
> current 100 ms interval for the P5520 case and for large-MTFA devices.

nvme_wait_ready() has a similar polling loop on the csts register, but
it does a udelay_range for 1-2 msecs no matter what the ready timeout
is. Maybe just do the same for consistency?