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.
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
arm64: agent_policy build always pulls amd64 opa binary #8375
Conversation
cd64f27
to
24eefdc
Compare
24eefdc
to
f9ea997
Compare
/ok-to-test |
/test |
f9ea997
to
cd7b899
Compare
/ok-to-test |
/test |
@fidencio PTAL |
cd7b899
to
2df3b17
Compare
c10a06c
to
1fdc5a7
Compare
The versions.yaml has a default for the amd64 binary, but there is no code to actually build the arm64 binary, which seems an overlook. Let's simplify the OPA logic by removing the direct link to the binary, and construct that link as part of the checks we do to decide whether we need to build OPA or not. Fixes: kata-containers#8373 Signed-off-by: Zvonko Kaiser <zkaiser@nvidia.com> Signed-off-by: Fabiano Fidêncio <fabiano.fidencio@intel.com>
1fdc5a7
to
ab597a4
Compare
case ${ARCH} in | ||
x86_64) opa_binary_arch="amd64" ;; | ||
aarch64) opa_binary_arch="arm64" ;; | ||
*) die "Unsupported architecture for the OPA binary" ;; | ||
esac |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I proposed this, and I'd like to state that I'm not a big fond of this, as we already have this logic in a lot of places in our repo.
However, this is needed here, and building the OPA agent as part of the rootfs will be short-lived (theoretically), as we want to actually just use a binary that was built in a previous state, but that's not for now.
All in all, lgtm, thanks @zvonkok!
Thanks for improving this script @zvonkok ! |
/test |
The versions.yaml has only a default amd64 binary configured extend the versions.yaml for aarch64 as well.
Fixes: #8373