Re: [PATCH RFC v2 00/19] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring

[Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>]

On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 11:28:43AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
> I have addressed it several times in the past. tldr is that yeah the
> initial history of io_uring wasn't great, due to some unfortunate
> initial design choices (mostly around async worker setup and
> identities).

Not to pick on you too much but the initial history looked pretty messy
to me - a lot of layering violations - it made aio.c look clean.

I know you were in "get shit done" mode, but at some point we have to
take a step back and ask "what are the different core concepts being
expressed here, and can we start picking them apart?". A generic
ringbuffer would be a good place to start.

I'd also really like to see some more standardized mechanisms for "I'm a
kernel thread doing work on behalf of some other user thread" - this
comes up elsewhere, I'm talking with David Howells right now about
fsconfig which is another place it is or will be coming up.

> Those have since been rectified, and the code base is
> stable and solid these days.

good tests, code coverage analysis to verify, good syzbot coverage?