[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] automation: set architecture in docker files
On Tue, 14 Nov 2023, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 03:00:17PM +0000, Anthony PERARD wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 10:01:06AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 04:10:24PM -0800, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > > > On Mon, 13 Nov 2023, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > > > > > Pass the desired architecture of the image in the FROM instruction if > > > > > the > > > > > image is possibly multi-platform. > > > > > > > > > > This allows using the x86 Dockerfiles on OS X on arm64 hardware. > > > > > > > > > > No functional change intended. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Although I am not opposed to this change, so far we have been using: > > > > arm64v8/alpine:3.18 > > > > > > > > for x86 it is not specified but it would be: > > > > amd64/alpine:3.18 > > > > > > > > Two options: > > > > 1) we add amd64/ everywhere and leave the arm containers alone > > > > 2) we change all containers, including the arm containers, to use the > > > > --platform option > > > > > > > > I don't think is a good idea to have 2 different ways to specify the > > > > architecture for x86 and arm containers > > > > > > I'm not an expert on this, but attempting to use (2): > > > > > > -FROM arm64v8/alpine:3.18 > > > +FROM --platform=linux/arm64v8 alpine:3.18 > > > > > > Does not work for me: > > > > > > % make -C automation/build alpine/3.18-arm64v8 > > > docker build --pull -t > > > registry.gitlab.com/xen-project/xen/alpine:3.18-arm64v8 -f > > > alpine/3.18-arm64v8.dockerfile alpine > > > [+] Building 1.4s (3/3) FINISHED > > > docker:desktop-linux > > > => [internal] load .dockerignore > > > 0.0s > > > => => transferring context: 2B > > > 0.0s > > > => [internal] load build definition from 3.18-arm64v8.dockerfile > > > 0.0s > > > => => transferring dockerfile: 818B > > > 0.0s > > > => ERROR [internal] load metadata for docker.io/library/alpine:3.18 > > > 1.4s > > > ------ > > > > [internal] load metadata for docker.io/library/alpine:3.18: > > > ------ > > > 3.18-arm64v8.dockerfile:1 > > > -------------------- > > > 1 | >>> FROM --platform=linux/arm64v8 alpine:3.18 > > > 2 | LABEL maintainer.name="The Xen Project" \ > > > 3 | maintainer.email="xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" > > > -------------------- > > > ERROR: failed to solve: alpine:3.18: no match for platform in manifest > > > sha256:eece025e432126ce23f223450a0326fbebde39cdf496a85d8c016293fc851978: > > > not found > > > make: *** [alpine/3.18-arm64v8] Error 1 > > > > > > That's why I've left the prefixed images alone. > > > > > > I could prefix the x86 images with amd64/ if that's preferred, I > > > didn't try that option, as the Docker manual suggested using > > > --platform. > > > > So a few things to know, "--platform=linux/amd64" just select a > > different build of one container. For example, for the "alpine" > > containers, you can see all the different builds available on the docker > > hub, here a few links: > > - Official Docker, Alpine images, home: > > https://hub.docker.com/_/alpine > > - The different builds: > > https://hub.docker.com/_/alpine/tags > > > > So, for amd64v8, you probably want --platform=linux/arm64/v8 > > Interesting, I guess I was looking at an outdated documentation that > stated the tag as arm64v8 instead of arm64/v8. > > > > > Then, they are per-architecture repository that make it easier to deal > > with foreign architecture, and probably maintained by a different > > community. e.g. for alpine arm64v8: > > https://hub.docker.com/r/arm64v8/alpine/ > > > > Those provide a build for a single architecture. > > Right, so those two are not actually the same image. I wonder whether > we would want to uniformly switch to using --platform when possible, > in order to make sure we are using the same (multi arch) image to > avoid surprises. > > > > > > > Sometime, you actually need to "--platform=*" to select a particular > > architecture, like I did for "jessie-i386.dockerfile". > > > > > > One thing I've notice when using --platform is that, if for example I > > use the container "--platform=linux/amd64 alpine:3" then > > "--platform=linux/arm/v6 alpine:3"; later when I only specify > > "alpine:3", it's going to be the armv6, and I think docker is going to > > complain if I try tu use "--platform=linux/amd64 alpine:3" without > > "docker pull" first (or I guess docker build --pull). > > > > Hope that help. > > > > So I guess using containers "amd64/*" or "arm64v8/*" is fine, but > > sometime will need to use "--platform=*". > > My take is that it's better to use --platform when possible, as then > all platforms share the same image, and the contents of the image > should be more consistent. > > I guess we could see about switching some of the image that currently > use a prefix (like the Alpine one) in order to instead use --platform > and share the same image. I wouldn't want to do it in this patch > however, as the change presented here should be non-functional, while > switching to the multi arch image might introduce changes. I am OK with any way forward as long as we are consistent across architectures. If you don't want to change the existing arm64v8 prefixes, I am fine with that, but then I would ask you to use the amd64 prefix not to break consistency (do not use --platform). After that, if you prefer to use --platform, I am totally fine with that too and it can be a follow-up patch changing the containers of both architectures.
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |