On Sat, Jun 14, 2025 at 11:08 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I feel WARNING and CAUTION markups could be a little strong for the > > concerned case. Such markups are generally used when there is a > > side-effect involved with the usage. But in our case, there is no such > > side-effect with the API. At max it may fail without harming the > > system and will succeed in the next invocation. But I also feel that > > such sections catch user attention. Thus if needed, we can have a NOTE > > section to convey the recommended way of slot synchronization. > > > > I think NOTE is fine for API in this case, but we can mention that the > API is more prone to get the synchronization failure message, as you > have shown in the patch. It would also be better to briefly explain in > user terms why the API is more prone to such a failure. > Thanks Peter and Amit for feedback. I have updated the patch. thanks Shveta
v5-0001-Improve-log-messages-and-docs-for-slotsync.patch
Description: Binary data
