Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds - #30

Open
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x
Open

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds#30
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x

Conversation

@timower

@timowertimower commented Sep 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This should allow the toolchain to be easily used on apple silicon macs (or any other arm64 device).

Closes#28

@EeemsEeems left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that if you use buildx, DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 is no longer needed

Comment threadscripts/build Outdated
@timower

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I'll try something like https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/multi-platform/#distribute-build-across-multiple-runners, otherwise I guess this isn't feasible

@Eeems

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

@EeemsEeems mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2024
@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

trixmoe commented Jan 31, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My optimism in regards to M1 runners was short-sighted: GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization on those runners, which results in the VM not being able to boot up. There's thus no way to really improve the earlier amd64 Linux runner solution('s run time).

I found out about this through the issue I opened on the colima repo, and the announcement PR on actions/runner-images, which pointed at the GitHub docs:

(...) nested-virtualization is not supported by arm64 runners

Tl;dr of this whole ordeal

Stick with amd64 Linux runners (for the foreseeable future).
GH doesn't seem to be currently working on Linux arm64 runners (actions/runner-images#5631).

@jandubois

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization

Note that while GitHub claims it to be a limitation of Apple's Virtualization Framework, it really is a limitation of the M1 chip architecture; nested virtualization is supported by Apple's Virtualization Framework on M2 and M3 chips, which are based on a newer ARM spec.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

I've looked at the dependencies between the images, and I've realized that one could have 3 different stages, with each image having it's own separate job. Using different jobs also allows it to go over the 6 hour limit.

Stage 1 would be the initial one, Stage 2 starts once toolchain is done, Stage 3 starts once base is done. Each of the blocks are separate jobs.

multi stage building

One would have to look into the exporting of images, to transfer them between jobs, for builds that are not published.
One could also separate amd64 and arm64 builds, but I'm unsure if this is doable when publishing to the image repository.

@Eeems

Eeems commented Feb 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would recommend moving dotnet6 to stage 3 as well, make that dynamic, and have toolchain and base be static steps.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I looked more into multi-platform Docker images, as I had some time.

Separating the building of the images per platform is possible (exporting/importing single-platform images is no issue), but combining the images at the end is slightly hacky, as Docker does not support direct publishing of multi-platform "images" (manifest), but rather forces the individual images to be published already before creating the multi-platform manifest. (docker/cli#3350)

To get around this, one can publish the single-platform images onto a local registry ran through GHA services. Once they are published, create the manifest, and push it locally. Finally, it's possible to copy the multi-platform "image" to the public registry. (Similarly to rapidsai/gha-tools#51)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@timower@Eeems@trixmoe@jandubois
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Skip to content

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds - #30

Open
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x
Open

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds#30
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x

Conversation

@timower

@timowertimower commented Sep 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This should allow the toolchain to be easily used on apple silicon macs (or any other arm64 device).

Closes#28

@EeemsEeems left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that if you use buildx, DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 is no longer needed

Comment threadscripts/build Outdated
@timower

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I'll try something like https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/multi-platform/#distribute-build-across-multiple-runners, otherwise I guess this isn't feasible

@Eeems

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

@EeemsEeems mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2024
@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

trixmoe commented Jan 31, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My optimism in regards to M1 runners was short-sighted: GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization on those runners, which results in the VM not being able to boot up. There's thus no way to really improve the earlier amd64 Linux runner solution('s run time).

I found out about this through the issue I opened on the colima repo, and the announcement PR on actions/runner-images, which pointed at the GitHub docs:

(...) nested-virtualization is not supported by arm64 runners

Tl;dr of this whole ordeal

Stick with amd64 Linux runners (for the foreseeable future).
GH doesn't seem to be currently working on Linux arm64 runners (actions/runner-images#5631).

@jandubois

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization

Note that while GitHub claims it to be a limitation of Apple's Virtualization Framework, it really is a limitation of the M1 chip architecture; nested virtualization is supported by Apple's Virtualization Framework on M2 and M3 chips, which are based on a newer ARM spec.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

I've looked at the dependencies between the images, and I've realized that one could have 3 different stages, with each image having it's own separate job. Using different jobs also allows it to go over the 6 hour limit.

Stage 1 would be the initial one, Stage 2 starts once toolchain is done, Stage 3 starts once base is done. Each of the blocks are separate jobs.

multi stage building

One would have to look into the exporting of images, to transfer them between jobs, for builds that are not published.
One could also separate amd64 and arm64 builds, but I'm unsure if this is doable when publishing to the image repository.

@Eeems

Eeems commented Feb 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would recommend moving dotnet6 to stage 3 as well, make that dynamic, and have toolchain and base be static steps.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I looked more into multi-platform Docker images, as I had some time.

Separating the building of the images per platform is possible (exporting/importing single-platform images is no issue), but combining the images at the end is slightly hacky, as Docker does not support direct publishing of multi-platform "images" (manifest), but rather forces the individual images to be published already before creating the multi-platform manifest. (docker/cli#3350)

To get around this, one can publish the single-platform images onto a local registry ran through GHA services. Once they are published, create the manifest, and push it locally. Finally, it's possible to copy the multi-platform "image" to the public registry. (Similarly to rapidsai/gha-tools#51)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@timower@Eeems@trixmoe@jandubois
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds - #30

Open
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x
Open

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds#30
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x

Conversation

@timower

@timowertimower commented Sep 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This should allow the toolchain to be easily used on apple silicon macs (or any other arm64 device).

Closes#28

@EeemsEeems left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that if you use buildx, DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 is no longer needed

Comment threadscripts/build Outdated
@timower

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I'll try something like https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/multi-platform/#distribute-build-across-multiple-runners, otherwise I guess this isn't feasible

@Eeems

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

@EeemsEeems mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2024
@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

trixmoe commented Jan 31, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My optimism in regards to M1 runners was short-sighted: GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization on those runners, which results in the VM not being able to boot up. There's thus no way to really improve the earlier amd64 Linux runner solution('s run time).

I found out about this through the issue I opened on the colima repo, and the announcement PR on actions/runner-images, which pointed at the GitHub docs:

(...) nested-virtualization is not supported by arm64 runners

Tl;dr of this whole ordeal

Stick with amd64 Linux runners (for the foreseeable future).
GH doesn't seem to be currently working on Linux arm64 runners (actions/runner-images#5631).

@jandubois

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization

Note that while GitHub claims it to be a limitation of Apple's Virtualization Framework, it really is a limitation of the M1 chip architecture; nested virtualization is supported by Apple's Virtualization Framework on M2 and M3 chips, which are based on a newer ARM spec.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

I've looked at the dependencies between the images, and I've realized that one could have 3 different stages, with each image having it's own separate job. Using different jobs also allows it to go over the 6 hour limit.

Stage 1 would be the initial one, Stage 2 starts once toolchain is done, Stage 3 starts once base is done. Each of the blocks are separate jobs.

multi stage building

One would have to look into the exporting of images, to transfer them between jobs, for builds that are not published.
One could also separate amd64 and arm64 builds, but I'm unsure if this is doable when publishing to the image repository.

@Eeems

Eeems commented Feb 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would recommend moving dotnet6 to stage 3 as well, make that dynamic, and have toolchain and base be static steps.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I looked more into multi-platform Docker images, as I had some time.

Separating the building of the images per platform is possible (exporting/importing single-platform images is no issue), but combining the images at the end is slightly hacky, as Docker does not support direct publishing of multi-platform "images" (manifest), but rather forces the individual images to be published already before creating the multi-platform manifest. (docker/cli#3350)

To get around this, one can publish the single-platform images onto a local registry ran through GHA services. Once they are published, create the manifest, and push it locally. Finally, it's possible to copy the multi-platform "image" to the public registry. (Similarly to rapidsai/gha-tools#51)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@timower@Eeems@trixmoe@jandubois
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds - #30

Open
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x
Open

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds#30
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x

Conversation

@timower

@timowertimower commented Sep 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This should allow the toolchain to be easily used on apple silicon macs (or any other arm64 device).

Closes#28

@EeemsEeems left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that if you use buildx, DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 is no longer needed

Comment threadscripts/build Outdated
@timower

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I'll try something like https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/multi-platform/#distribute-build-across-multiple-runners, otherwise I guess this isn't feasible

@Eeems

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

@EeemsEeems mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2024
@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

trixmoe commented Jan 31, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My optimism in regards to M1 runners was short-sighted: GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization on those runners, which results in the VM not being able to boot up. There's thus no way to really improve the earlier amd64 Linux runner solution('s run time).

I found out about this through the issue I opened on the colima repo, and the announcement PR on actions/runner-images, which pointed at the GitHub docs:

(...) nested-virtualization is not supported by arm64 runners

Tl;dr of this whole ordeal

Stick with amd64 Linux runners (for the foreseeable future).
GH doesn't seem to be currently working on Linux arm64 runners (actions/runner-images#5631).

@jandubois

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization

Note that while GitHub claims it to be a limitation of Apple's Virtualization Framework, it really is a limitation of the M1 chip architecture; nested virtualization is supported by Apple's Virtualization Framework on M2 and M3 chips, which are based on a newer ARM spec.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

I've looked at the dependencies between the images, and I've realized that one could have 3 different stages, with each image having it's own separate job. Using different jobs also allows it to go over the 6 hour limit.

Stage 1 would be the initial one, Stage 2 starts once toolchain is done, Stage 3 starts once base is done. Each of the blocks are separate jobs.

multi stage building

One would have to look into the exporting of images, to transfer them between jobs, for builds that are not published.
One could also separate amd64 and arm64 builds, but I'm unsure if this is doable when publishing to the image repository.

@Eeems

Eeems commented Feb 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would recommend moving dotnet6 to stage 3 as well, make that dynamic, and have toolchain and base be static steps.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I looked more into multi-platform Docker images, as I had some time.

Separating the building of the images per platform is possible (exporting/importing single-platform images is no issue), but combining the images at the end is slightly hacky, as Docker does not support direct publishing of multi-platform "images" (manifest), but rather forces the individual images to be published already before creating the multi-platform manifest. (docker/cli#3350)

To get around this, one can publish the single-platform images onto a local registry ran through GHA services. Once they are published, create the manifest, and push it locally. Finally, it's possible to copy the multi-platform "image" to the public registry. (Similarly to rapidsai/gha-tools#51)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@timower@Eeems@trixmoe@jandubois
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Skip to content

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds - #30

Open
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x
Open

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds#30
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x

Conversation

@timower

@timowertimower commented Sep 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This should allow the toolchain to be easily used on apple silicon macs (or any other arm64 device).

Closes#28

@EeemsEeems left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that if you use buildx, DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 is no longer needed

Comment threadscripts/build Outdated
@timower

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I'll try something like https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/multi-platform/#distribute-build-across-multiple-runners, otherwise I guess this isn't feasible

@Eeems

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

@EeemsEeems mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2024
@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

trixmoe commented Jan 31, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My optimism in regards to M1 runners was short-sighted: GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization on those runners, which results in the VM not being able to boot up. There's thus no way to really improve the earlier amd64 Linux runner solution('s run time).

I found out about this through the issue I opened on the colima repo, and the announcement PR on actions/runner-images, which pointed at the GitHub docs:

(...) nested-virtualization is not supported by arm64 runners

Tl;dr of this whole ordeal

Stick with amd64 Linux runners (for the foreseeable future).
GH doesn't seem to be currently working on Linux arm64 runners (actions/runner-images#5631).

@jandubois

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization

Note that while GitHub claims it to be a limitation of Apple's Virtualization Framework, it really is a limitation of the M1 chip architecture; nested virtualization is supported by Apple's Virtualization Framework on M2 and M3 chips, which are based on a newer ARM spec.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

I've looked at the dependencies between the images, and I've realized that one could have 3 different stages, with each image having it's own separate job. Using different jobs also allows it to go over the 6 hour limit.

Stage 1 would be the initial one, Stage 2 starts once toolchain is done, Stage 3 starts once base is done. Each of the blocks are separate jobs.

multi stage building

One would have to look into the exporting of images, to transfer them between jobs, for builds that are not published.
One could also separate amd64 and arm64 builds, but I'm unsure if this is doable when publishing to the image repository.

@Eeems

Eeems commented Feb 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would recommend moving dotnet6 to stage 3 as well, make that dynamic, and have toolchain and base be static steps.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I looked more into multi-platform Docker images, as I had some time.

Separating the building of the images per platform is possible (exporting/importing single-platform images is no issue), but combining the images at the end is slightly hacky, as Docker does not support direct publishing of multi-platform "images" (manifest), but rather forces the individual images to be published already before creating the multi-platform manifest. (docker/cli#3350)

To get around this, one can publish the single-platform images onto a local registry ran through GHA services. Once they are published, create the manifest, and push it locally. Finally, it's possible to copy the multi-platform "image" to the public registry. (Similarly to rapidsai/gha-tools#51)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@timower@Eeems@trixmoe@jandubois
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds - #30

Open
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x
Open

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds#30
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x

Conversation

@timower

@timowertimower commented Sep 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This should allow the toolchain to be easily used on apple silicon macs (or any other arm64 device).

Closes#28

@EeemsEeems left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that if you use buildx, DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 is no longer needed

Comment threadscripts/build Outdated
@timower

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I'll try something like https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/multi-platform/#distribute-build-across-multiple-runners, otherwise I guess this isn't feasible

@Eeems

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

@EeemsEeems mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2024
@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

trixmoe commented Jan 31, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My optimism in regards to M1 runners was short-sighted: GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization on those runners, which results in the VM not being able to boot up. There's thus no way to really improve the earlier amd64 Linux runner solution('s run time).

I found out about this through the issue I opened on the colima repo, and the announcement PR on actions/runner-images, which pointed at the GitHub docs:

(...) nested-virtualization is not supported by arm64 runners

Tl;dr of this whole ordeal

Stick with amd64 Linux runners (for the foreseeable future).
GH doesn't seem to be currently working on Linux arm64 runners (actions/runner-images#5631).

@jandubois

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization

Note that while GitHub claims it to be a limitation of Apple's Virtualization Framework, it really is a limitation of the M1 chip architecture; nested virtualization is supported by Apple's Virtualization Framework on M2 and M3 chips, which are based on a newer ARM spec.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

I've looked at the dependencies between the images, and I've realized that one could have 3 different stages, with each image having it's own separate job. Using different jobs also allows it to go over the 6 hour limit.

Stage 1 would be the initial one, Stage 2 starts once toolchain is done, Stage 3 starts once base is done. Each of the blocks are separate jobs.

multi stage building

One would have to look into the exporting of images, to transfer them between jobs, for builds that are not published.
One could also separate amd64 and arm64 builds, but I'm unsure if this is doable when publishing to the image repository.

@Eeems

Eeems commented Feb 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would recommend moving dotnet6 to stage 3 as well, make that dynamic, and have toolchain and base be static steps.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I looked more into multi-platform Docker images, as I had some time.

Separating the building of the images per platform is possible (exporting/importing single-platform images is no issue), but combining the images at the end is slightly hacky, as Docker does not support direct publishing of multi-platform "images" (manifest), but rather forces the individual images to be published already before creating the multi-platform manifest. (docker/cli#3350)

To get around this, one can publish the single-platform images onto a local registry ran through GHA services. Once they are published, create the manifest, and push it locally. Finally, it's possible to copy the multi-platform "image" to the public registry. (Similarly to rapidsai/gha-tools#51)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@timower@Eeems@trixmoe@jandubois
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds - #30

Open
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x
Open

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds#30
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x

Conversation

@timower

@timowertimower commented Sep 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This should allow the toolchain to be easily used on apple silicon macs (or any other arm64 device).

Closes#28

@EeemsEeems left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that if you use buildx, DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 is no longer needed

Comment threadscripts/build Outdated
@timower

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I'll try something like https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/multi-platform/#distribute-build-across-multiple-runners, otherwise I guess this isn't feasible

@Eeems

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

@EeemsEeems mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2024
@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

trixmoe commented Jan 31, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My optimism in regards to M1 runners was short-sighted: GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization on those runners, which results in the VM not being able to boot up. There's thus no way to really improve the earlier amd64 Linux runner solution('s run time).

I found out about this through the issue I opened on the colima repo, and the announcement PR on actions/runner-images, which pointed at the GitHub docs:

(...) nested-virtualization is not supported by arm64 runners

Tl;dr of this whole ordeal

Stick with amd64 Linux runners (for the foreseeable future).
GH doesn't seem to be currently working on Linux arm64 runners (actions/runner-images#5631).

@jandubois

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization

Note that while GitHub claims it to be a limitation of Apple's Virtualization Framework, it really is a limitation of the M1 chip architecture; nested virtualization is supported by Apple's Virtualization Framework on M2 and M3 chips, which are based on a newer ARM spec.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

I've looked at the dependencies between the images, and I've realized that one could have 3 different stages, with each image having it's own separate job. Using different jobs also allows it to go over the 6 hour limit.

Stage 1 would be the initial one, Stage 2 starts once toolchain is done, Stage 3 starts once base is done. Each of the blocks are separate jobs.

multi stage building

One would have to look into the exporting of images, to transfer them between jobs, for builds that are not published.
One could also separate amd64 and arm64 builds, but I'm unsure if this is doable when publishing to the image repository.

@Eeems

Eeems commented Feb 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would recommend moving dotnet6 to stage 3 as well, make that dynamic, and have toolchain and base be static steps.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I looked more into multi-platform Docker images, as I had some time.

Separating the building of the images per platform is possible (exporting/importing single-platform images is no issue), but combining the images at the end is slightly hacky, as Docker does not support direct publishing of multi-platform "images" (manifest), but rather forces the individual images to be published already before creating the multi-platform manifest. (docker/cli#3350)

To get around this, one can publish the single-platform images onto a local registry ran through GHA services. Once they are published, create the manifest, and push it locally. Finally, it's possible to copy the multi-platform "image" to the public registry. (Similarly to rapidsai/gha-tools#51)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@timower@Eeems@trixmoe@jandubois
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
Skip to content

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds - #30

Open
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x
Open

Add linux/arm64 platforms to image builds#30
timower wants to merge 1 commit into
toltec-dev:v3.xfrom
timower:v3.x

Conversation

@timower

@timowertimower commented Sep 28, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This should allow the toolchain to be easily used on apple silicon macs (or any other arm64 device).

Closes#28

@EeemsEeems left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is that if you use buildx, DOCKER_BUILDKIT=1 is no longer needed

Comment threadscripts/build Outdated
@timower

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I'll try something like https://docs.docker.com/build/ci/github-actions/multi-platform/#distribute-build-across-multiple-runners, otherwise I guess this isn't feasible

@Eeems

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

@EeemsEeems mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2024
@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

This comment was marked as outdated.

@trixmoe

trixmoe commented Jan 31, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown

My optimism in regards to M1 runners was short-sighted: GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization on those runners, which results in the VM not being able to boot up. There's thus no way to really improve the earlier amd64 Linux runner solution('s run time).

I found out about this through the issue I opened on the colima repo, and the announcement PR on actions/runner-images, which pointed at the GitHub docs:

(...) nested-virtualization is not supported by arm64 runners

Tl;dr of this whole ordeal

Stick with amd64 Linux runners (for the foreseeable future).
GH doesn't seem to be currently working on Linux arm64 runners (actions/runner-images#5631).

@jandubois

Copy link
Copy Markdown

GitHub (and simply Apple) does not support (nested) virtualization

Note that while GitHub claims it to be a limitation of Apple's Virtualization Framework, it really is a limitation of the M1 chip architecture; nested virtualization is supported by Apple's Virtualization Framework on M2 and M3 chips, which are based on a newer ARM spec.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

To avoid timeouts due to how long it takes, probably. It might also make sense to split out the images into their own jobs as well. I've done that for the images I have generating nightly: https://github.com/Eeems/images/blob/main/.github/workflows/build.yml

I've looked at the dependencies between the images, and I've realized that one could have 3 different stages, with each image having it's own separate job. Using different jobs also allows it to go over the 6 hour limit.

Stage 1 would be the initial one, Stage 2 starts once toolchain is done, Stage 3 starts once base is done. Each of the blocks are separate jobs.

multi stage building

One would have to look into the exporting of images, to transfer them between jobs, for builds that are not published.
One could also separate amd64 and arm64 builds, but I'm unsure if this is doable when publishing to the image repository.

@Eeems

Eeems commented Feb 7, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I would recommend moving dotnet6 to stage 3 as well, make that dynamic, and have toolchain and base be static steps.

@trixmoe

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I looked more into multi-platform Docker images, as I had some time.

Separating the building of the images per platform is possible (exporting/importing single-platform images is no issue), but combining the images at the end is slightly hacky, as Docker does not support direct publishing of multi-platform "images" (manifest), but rather forces the individual images to be published already before creating the multi-platform manifest. (docker/cli#3350)

To get around this, one can publish the single-platform images onto a local registry ran through GHA services. Once they are published, create the manifest, and push it locally. Finally, it's possible to copy the multi-platform "image" to the public registry. (Similarly to rapidsai/gha-tools#51)

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@timower@Eeems@trixmoe@jandubois