From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-176.mta1.migadu.com (out-176.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1AB0224EF for ; Thu, 30 May 2024 17:16:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.176 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717089372; cv=none; b=ZG+0IoERl93NymB7KsMvyRudW0/rDdiynbPoViSt1iYKOReI40RaWPRYkYJD55ioci91TgoN19DHcQ6FTCEbyE0WAM8mKRvbZ0TSolnztvzhbfJ0WPrwUITXPIVhQWsfZLlNIT7QeapwRCtPXBsk2pelnbFID16my4SPUhvffhE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717089372; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3lzGOp7sF8vqreR4fWQ/fXEDhVryJycvRpkWMgP1ufo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=F831HGXoV+w8VYXm7JfMAfV+l2LNWEiNz9LkfHmXAjANS4ktCy1gyq9M+vHCRLbA5NC7yONg+XJK4O+HdG/ikJ0EyMdSW+ESowmUwv+zmCTce4dJ7JIDwIVzQDC+ysmxWo/rHADPX4QqKTHpuzwnXz80jJwSydL8D/pZjma2RQM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=cbdQ1Lso; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.176 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="cbdQ1Lso" X-Envelope-To: axboe@kernel.dk DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1717089366; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+5pMemE92Q/Hlqbz3hKReYhxOMEPt7jEsfuulDZAkng=; b=cbdQ1LsodzTPXjrWT32Yd9zdGDNcSo3cyvQaEoh1clzzPGfw9+nsfk2MK0o87bbgw0WZc2 /SonzfpuO069eS4OaZF8VqGbYCo77kwF3e1wEqB5kQ81g26/7EFJeB/9HJm28mnGmJNjee F5Z20qtYalupc5/jx0VPX+1674YPKKw= X-Envelope-To: bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm X-Envelope-To: bschubert@ddn.com X-Envelope-To: miklos@szeredi.hu X-Envelope-To: amir73il@gmail.com X-Envelope-To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org X-Envelope-To: akpm@linux-foundation.org X-Envelope-To: linux-mm@kvack.org X-Envelope-To: mingo@redhat.com X-Envelope-To: peterz@infradead.org X-Envelope-To: avagin@google.com X-Envelope-To: io-uring@vger.kernel.org X-Envelope-To: ming.lei@redhat.com X-Envelope-To: asml.silence@gmail.com X-Envelope-To: josef@toxicpanda.com Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 13:16:01 -0400 X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Kent Overstreet To: Jens Axboe Cc: Bernd Schubert , Bernd Schubert , Miklos Szeredi , Amir Goldstein , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Andrei Vagin , io-uring@vger.kernel.org, Ming Lei , Pavel Begunkov , Josef Bacik Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 00/19] fuse: fuse-over-io-uring Message-ID: References: <20240529-fuse-uring-for-6-9-rfc2-out-v1-0-d149476b1d65@ddn.com> <5mimjjxul2sc2g7x6pttnit46pbw3astwj2giqfr4xayp63el2@fb5bgtiavwgv> <8c3548a9-3b15-49c4-9e38-68d81433144a@fastmail.fm> <9db5fc0c-cce5-4d01-af60-f28f55c3aa99@kernel.dk> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9db5fc0c-cce5-4d01-af60-f28f55c3aa99@kernel.dk> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 10:21:19AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 5/30/24 10:02 AM, Bernd Schubert wrote: > > From our side, a customer has pointed out security concerns for io-uring. > > That's just bs and fud these days. You have a history of being less than responsive with bug reports, and this sort of attitude is not the attitude of a responsible maintainer. >From what I've seen those concerns were well founded, so if you want to be taking seriously I'd be talking about what was done to address them instead of namecalling.