I’m a native speaker, read it wrong at first, and had to think step by step. “well, libuv is a JS-related library, io_ring is an OS level concept, so its probably a change to libuv”, and still had uncertainty and opened GitHub to double check.

You make a really good point I never heard before: X for Y is an ambiguous construct with two names referring to the same class of object, without an obvious relationship. Ex. Barack for Don is easy, but only if you know American politics, a reference to “a predecessor”. But “Jon for Mary” is inscrutable.

That would be "io_uring: support for libuv". Which is a common way to write headlines, so assuming the headline was missing punctuation was reasonable.

(in case the title changes later, it's currently "io_uring support for libuv")

I think this is a slightly different case than the WSL one. The headline is accurate, but perhaps a bit jarring. It might have been better to say "io_uring support in libuv" but I would say using from is not incorrect.

Hm? The word “for” has the same meaning here as in “food for kids”. Read it as (io_uring support) for (libuv). “Io_uring support” is being provided. Provided for what? Provided for libuv.

Looking at it again I think the problem is that both X and Y are of the same type which makes the overall sentence confusing, even though it is technically correct.

In a more normal construction ("food voucher support for kids") it is obvious from context that the kids are being given the support, because the converse would be nonsensical.

While "Engineers for Ukraine" is probably about building drones and shipping them to the Russian border region.