Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

docker: Add arm64-based Dockerfile #505

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

docker: Add arm64-based Dockerfile #505

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

tboehler1
Copy link
Contributor

I needed an arm64-based Docker image to run debos but it seems like you don't provide one.

This PR contains the Dockerfile I use to build images on arm64. Arch Linux specific things (notably the archlinux-keyring) aren't installed and handled at all, but seeing that #483 is open this might be put into a separate conatiner for building Arch Linux images anyway?

Feel free to merge if you're okay with the Dockerfile and want to support arm64-based Docker images upstream. Of course I'm open to improve this as well.

Thanks!

@obbardc
Copy link
Member

obbardc commented Jun 11, 2024

This isn't built in ci? :-)

Also, would it be possible to just extend the actions to set the build arch to arm64 with the same Dockerfile ?

@tboehler1
Copy link
Contributor Author

With actions you mean the steps running in the CI? I'm not familiar with the GitHub CI at all, I'm not sure if I can be of help there.

I imagine using ARG in the Dockerfile and passing arm64 with --build-arg ARCH=arm64 doesn't work because there is some logic involved with the different architectures, i.e. arm64 would imply using arm64v8/debian but it would also imply installing linux-image-arm64 and not installing user-mode-linux (as it's not available for arm64). I'm not aware of Docker being able to handle logic this in Dockerfiles but do correct me if I'm wrong.

@nbuchwitz
Copy link
Contributor

nbuchwitz commented Aug 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Thanks, @tboehler1 for bringing this up. A native docker container for arm64 builds is a good idea as it encapsulates everything, but keeps the huge benefit when it comes to build times.

I agree with @obbardc, that it would be better to maintain a single Dockerfile for all target architectures. This can be done with dockers multiarch support like this:

diff --git a/docker/Dockerfile b/docker/Dockerfile
index dd4d3ab..9ef83aa 100644
--- a/docker/Dockerfile
+++ b/docker/Dockerfile
@@ -1,9 +1,10 @@
 # Global ARGs shared by all stages
+ARG ARCH=
 ARG DEBIAN_FRONTEND=noninteractive
 ARG GOPATH=/usr/local/go
 
 ### first stage - builder ###
-FROM debian:bookworm-slim as builder
+FROM ${ARCH}debian:bookworm-slim AS builder
 
 ARG DEBIAN_FRONTEND
 ARG GOPATH
@@ -34,7 +35,24 @@ COPY docker/get-archlinux-keyring.sh /
 RUN /get-archlinux-keyring.sh /arch-keyring
 
 ### second stage - runner ###
-FROM debian:bookworm-slim as runner
+FROM ${ARCH}debian:bookworm-slim AS runner-amd64
+RUN apt-get update && \
+    apt-get install -y --no-install-recommends \
+        linux-image-amd64 \
+        qemu-system-x86 \
+        user-mode-linux && \
+    rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
+
+FROM ${ARCH}debian:bookworm-slim AS runner-arm64
+RUN apt-get update && \
+    apt-get install -y --no-install-recommends \
+        linux-image-arm64 \
+        qemu-system-arm \
+       # fixes: qemu-system-aarch64: failed to find romfile "efi-virtio.rom"
+       ipxe-qemu && \
+    rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*
+
+FROM runner-${TARGETARCH} AS runner
 
 ARG DEBIAN_FRONTEND
 ARG GOPATH
@@ -78,11 +96,9 @@ RUN apt-get update && \
         pigz \
         libostree-1-1 \
         libslirp-helper \
-        linux-image-amd64 \
         openssh-client \
         parted \
         pkg-config \
-        qemu-system-x86 \
         qemu-user-static \
         qemu-utils \
         rsync \
@@ -91,7 +107,6 @@ RUN apt-get update && \
         systemd-resolved \
         u-boot-tools \
         unzip \
-        user-mode-linux \
         xfsprogs \
         xz-utils \
         zip \

This would allow to override certain arch specific stuff in a separate stage. Even diffrent base images depending on the target arch are possible.

Build is done with explicit target arch:

docker buildx build --platform linux/arm64/v8 -f docker/Dockerfile -t godebos/debos .

and without:

docker buildx build -f docker/Dockerfile -t godebos/debos .

or

docker build -f docker/Dockerfile -t godebos/debos .

Even multiple architectures can be build at once:

docker buildx build --platform linux/arm/v7,linux/arm64/v8,linux/amd64 -f docker/Dockerfile -t godebos/debos .

Note that the list of packages for the specific and generic stage needs probably some review. Haven't checked @tboehler1 s list in detail against the original one.

The CI pipeline already uses docker/setup-buildx-action@v3, which supports the platforms parameter. So it would be really easy to build amd64 and arm64 images automatically.

@obbardc
Copy link
Member

obbardc commented Aug 19, 2024

@nbuchwitz I agree with your solution. Can you open a PR?

@nbuchwitz
Copy link
Contributor

Sure, @obbardc. I've created a feature branch in my fork https://github.com/nbuchwitz/debos/tree/devel/add-arm64-support

Need to rework some of the piplines to ensure that the multiarch container is tested properly (mostly migrate the build artifacts to oci exports). After that I will open the PR (probably later today or tomorrow).

@tboehler1 I've added you as co autor on the commit message.

@nbuchwitz nbuchwitz mentioned this pull request Aug 19, 2024
Merged
@obbardc
Copy link
Member

obbardc commented Oct 30, 2024

Fixed in #513

@obbardc obbardc closed this Oct 30, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@tboehler1 @obbardc @nbuchwitz