fix: use annotation for MirageOS block device name#753
Open
pocopepe wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
Related: urunc-dev#315 Signed-off-by: viju <avijusanjai@gmail.com>
Ref: urunc-dev#315 Signed-off-by: viju <avijusanjai@gmail.com>
✅ Deploy Preview for urunc canceled.
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
MirageOS unikernels declare their block device names at build time through the Solo5 manifest. urunc was hardcoding
"storage"as the block device ID, so if a unikernel declared a different name it would fail at runtime withResource not declared in manifest.Added a new annotation
com.urunc.unikernel.blkDevso image builders can set the block device name at build time. Falls back to"storage"when the annotation is absent so existing images keep working.Same approach as #690 for net device naming. Task 2 of 3 from #315.
Related issues
How was this tested?
With annotation (
com.urunc.unikernel.blkDev=storage, matches kernel manifest):solo5 accepts
--block:storage=...and boots.With wrong annotation (
com.urunc.unikernel.blkDev=blkdata, mismatches manifest):urunc passes the annotation value directly to solo5, solo5 rejects since the manifest only declares
storage.Without annotation (falls back to
storage):existing images without the annotation fall back to
storageand keep working.Pushed images:
LLM usage
Claude Sonnet 4.6
Checklist
make lint).make test_ctr,make test_nerdctl,make test_docker,make test_crictl).