Build Docker image for linux/aarch64 #1206
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Neat, first time seeing this!
I've approved the workflow run, take a look at the failure and my comments, happy to get this merged if you can get it working. FWIW I don't think the performance is much of an issue here (benchmarks appreciated if you've found otherwise) compared to the inconvenience of adding --platform=linux/amd64.
.github/workflows/docker.yml
Outdated
| @@ -30,8 +42,9 @@ jobs: | |||
| - name: Build and push | |||
| uses: docker/build-push-action@v2 | |||
| with: | |||
| platforms: ${{ matrix.platform }} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this right to be doing a matrix build/push for each platform? Do new platforms push into existing images?
If not, remove the matrix from this job and add a platforms output. Then, split docker run out into a test job. That job will be a matrix job, using the platforms output from the build job to set the platform list for the matrix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good question. After looking more closely with docker image inspect, this might not be working the way I'd assumed. 😅
While `aarch64` is an alias, the fully expanded identifier is more explicit.
The `load` option is necessary for Docker Buildx otherwise built images are only accessible to the builder.
Unfortunately, the previous job matrix will overwrite the other platforms so instead, we make use of an environment variable to specify each platform and pass it as-is when interfacing with Docker Buildx.
|
@bendrucker Thanks for your feedback! Unfortunately, it's a bit difficult to test these GitHub Actions myself but I think it should work.
Definitely! In this particular project's case, the performance difference is negligible. If you're interested in offering native support like the rest of the binary releases, I'd still consider it valuable. I'd understand though if it wasn't something you or other maintainers wanted to worry about. 🤷♀️ |
|
Seems like Actions doesn't consider you a "contributor" until a commit is associated with you in the repository's default branch. I thought workflow run approvals applied on a user's first PR/workflow run for a repository, but I guess we have to approve each run. https://github.blog/2021-04-22-github-actions-update-helping-maintainers-combat-bad-actors/ |
|
Speaking of performance... The arm64 build is ~5x slower than amd64. To be expected I guess, goreleaser takes ~20 mins to cross-compile and upload release binaries. Not really an issue considering we're also building for Windows.
Doesn't seem that way (cached), the |
| - name: docker run | ||
| run: docker run ghcr.io/${{ github.repository }}:${{ steps.meta.outputs.version }} -v | ||
| - name: Test | ||
| # NOTE(ivy): Docker Buildx doesn't support the --load flag when multiple |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there any issue we can link to on this?
|
@ivy What's the status now? I'm interested in merging this feature. |
|
I've confirmed the comments and I think this pull request is ready to merge. Revert if there is any problem. |
I noticed there's only a Docker image for
linux/amd64and wanted to propose adding support forlinux/aarch64. It's pretty useful to me as an Apple M1 and Docker Desktop user since I can get native performance out of tflint and avoid potential hiccups with x86_64 emulation. 😄