Skip to content

[Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in GitHub Actions #3570

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
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
May 9, 2025
Merged

[Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in GitHub Actions #3570

merged 3 commits into from
May 9, 2025

Conversation

400Ping
Copy link
Contributor

@400Ping 400Ping commented May 9, 2025

Why are these changes needed?

As title

Related issue number

Closes #3568

Checks

  • I've made sure the tests are passing.
  • Testing Strategy
    • Unit tests
    • Manual tests
    • This PR is not tested :(

400Ping added 2 commits May 9, 2025 14:31
@400Ping
[Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in GitHub Act…
fe12c29 
…ions

Signed-off-by: 400Ping <43886578+400Ping@users.noreply.github.com>
@400Ping
Merge branch 'master' into ci/multi-platform-build-fails
22c5b72 
Signed-off-by: Ping <43886578+400Ping@users.noreply.github.com>
@400Ping
Copy link
Contributor Author

400Ping commented May 9, 2025

@dentiny please review

@400Ping 400Ping changed the title [Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in GitHub Act… [Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in GitHub Actions May 9, 2025
@400Ping
Copy link
Contributor Author

400Ping commented May 9, 2025

@kevin85421 please review

@dentiny
Copy link
Contributor

dentiny commented May 9, 2025

I will take a look when I get back to the hotel, one comment: I would appreciate not to mix bug fix + refactor into one PR, or at least you could split into two commits, which makes easier to see what's the real change. Thanks.

@400Ping
Copy link
Contributor Author

400Ping commented May 9, 2025

Ok, noted.

dentiny
dentiny approved these changes May 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@dentiny dentiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

Curious do we need qemu setup? The repo said it's optional: https://github.com/docker/setup-buildx-action

@400Ping
Copy link
Contributor Author

400Ping commented May 9, 2025

Thanks!

Curious do we need qemu setup? The repo said it's optional: https://github.com/docker/setup-buildx-action

Strictly speaking we don’t need QEMU right now because our Dockerfile.buildx only copies the pre‑built binaries (no RUN commands in the arm64 stage). Should I remove them?

@dentiny
Copy link
Contributor

dentiny commented May 9, 2025

Strictly speaking we don’t need QEMU right now because our Dockerfile.buildx only copies the pre‑built binaries (no RUN commands in the arm64 stage). Should I remove them?

Yes, I would like to keep only necessary steps

  • it increases runtime
  • it confuses people, at first glance I don't know how qemu is related to our problem
  • if you do, please leave a short comment, thanks!

@400Ping
Copy link
Contributor Author

400Ping commented May 9, 2025

Ok, I will remove them now.

@400Ping
[Chore] Remove QEMU
d128390 
Signed-off-by: 400Ping <43886578+400Ping@users.noreply.github.com>
@400Ping 400Ping requested a review from dentiny May 9, 2025 18:16
kevin85421
kevin85421 approved these changes May 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@kevin85421 kevin85421 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I’ll merge this PR for now to see whether the issue is fixed. If not, I may revert related PRs.

It would be better to add more details to the PR description and explain how you tested it. This PR can't be tested by pre-merge CI pipeline, so it will be hard to review without the information about how do you test it.

@kevin85421 kevin85421 merged commit 0d813b4 into ray-project:master May 9, 2025
24 checks passed
kevin85421 added a commit to kevin85421/kuberay that referenced this pull request May 9, 2025
@kevin85421
Revert "[Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in Gi…
f08e417 
…tHub Actions (ray-project#3570)"

This reverts commit 0d813b4.
kevin85421 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 9, 2025
@kevin85421
Revert "[Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in Gi…
064e0ef 
…tHub Actions (#3570)" (#3573)

This reverts commit 0d813b4.
@kevin85421
Copy link
Member

kevin85421 commented May 9, 2025 •
edited
Loading

The CI failure is "Build MultiArch Docker Image and Push on Merge" from test-job.yaml instead of image-release.yaml. #3573 reverts this PR.

https://github.com/ray-project/kuberay/actions/runs/14935488144/job/41961791863
https://github.com/ray-project/kuberay/actions/runs/14912974191/job/41891655016

pawelpaszki pushed a commit to opendatahub-io/kuberay that referenced this pull request May 26, 2025
@400Ping @pawelpaszki
[Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in GitHub Act…
f92a5ad 
…ions (ray-project#3570)
pawelpaszki pushed a commit to opendatahub-io/kuberay that referenced this pull request May 26, 2025
@kevin85421 @pawelpaszki
Revert "[Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in Gi…
f78dc73 
…tHub Actions (ray-project#3570)" (ray-project#3573)

This reverts commit 0d813b4.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@kevin85421 kevin85421 kevin85421 approved these changes

@dentiny dentiny Awaiting requested review from dentiny

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug][CI] Multi-platform build fails with docker driver in GitHub Actions
3 participants
@400Ping @dentiny @kevin85421