Re: [PATCH net-next v16 05/15] quic: provide quic.h header files for kernel and userspace

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found more severe
issue(s) in other patches of this series. This mail is only an FYI, in case
you want to address the nit picks below when you respin.

Low priority / nit picks for your consideration:

- [Low] The commit's Signed-off-by chain doesn't follow
  Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.

--

quic: provide quic.h header files for kernel and userspace

This commit adds include/uapi/linux/quic.h, which holds the QUIC socket
API definitions: control messages, socket options and event structures.
It also adds an internal include/linux/quic.h that exports
quic_do_setsockopt() and quic_do_getsockopt() for kernel consumers.

Signed-off-by: Tyler Fanelli <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Dreibholz <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but the trailer ordering here doesn't seem to follow
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst.

The From: author is Xin Long, but the first Signed-off-by is Tyler
Fanelli. Two more sign-offs from other people come before the author's
own. The document asks for the SoB chain to reflect the real route of
the patch:

  "with the first SoB entry signalling primary authorship of a single
  author."

The same document also says that each co-author should have a
Co-developed-by: line directly before their Signed-off-by:.

Did Tyler Fanelli, Stefan Metzmacher and Thomas Dreibholz co-develop
this patch? If so, could each of them get a Co-developed-by: tag, with
the trailers reordered to match the documented example for a patch
submitted by its From: author?

If they reviewed or tested the patch instead, would Reviewed-by: or
Tested-by: be the right tags?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/sashiko/#/patchset/cover.1791227050.git.lucien.xin%40gmail.com