On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 09:12:39AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:

On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 17:24:42 +0800
Yang Ming <ming.1.yang@nokia-sbell.com> wrote:

1. /var/tmp is hard code which is not a good style
2. /var/tmp may be not allowed to be written via container's
read only mode.

Signed-off-by: Yang Ming <ming.1.yang@nokia-sbell.com>

Since this is a unix domain socket, why not use abstract socket
that doesn't have to be associated with filesystem?

In general, I think we should avoid abstract sockets in DPDK. Primary
reason is that they are linux-specific. Last time I checked other unixes,
like BSD, don't support them. A secondary concern is that having a
filesystem path allows permission checks, so for e.g. telemetry sockets,
only users with appropriate permissions can connect. With an abstract socket
we'd have to open up the area of user authentication.

/Bruce

Hi Stephen & Bruce,

I'm not sure whether abstract socket is a good idea. Maybe it can be improved further or step by step. But we don't need to discuss it for this commit. 
We do this improvement because "/var/tmp" and "/var/log" can't be write in Readonly mode of container except that we add /var/ specfic for DPDK application in container's setting. But nearly all DPDK modules have already used common runtime path returned from `rte_eal_get_runtime_dir()`. Why not we apply this common path for Mellanox NIC?