composefs: Support changing the kernel without rebuilding the rootfs image
维护者通常 1 天内回复
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
评估
- 难度
- 5/5
- 预计耗时
- 一周以上
- 新手友好度
- 35/100
- Issue 类型
- 功能
- 描述清晰度
- 基本清楚
- 活跃度
- 活跃
- 技术栈
- docker, rust
- 领域
- devops, infrastructure
调研方向
Start with the existing bootc container split-kernel-and-rootfs and bootc container ukify --kernel-dir flow from #2185, then read #1498 and docs/src/relationship-particles.md. The issue leaves the assembly design, rootfs digest strategy, initramfs approach, Secure Boot trust, and backend scope open. Done means agreeing on those choices and providing a documented kernel image contract and tooling for producing a bootable image with a separately supplied kernel.
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
描述
In the systemd DDI model the UKI is its own artifact: it pins the /usr
image by dm-verity root hash (usrhash=) and is updated by its own
systemd-sysupdate transfer, so in principle a new UKI can be built and
signed against an existing /usr image. In practice the kernel modules live
in /usr, so once /usr is sealed a kernel change still means a new image;
Bluefin Server hit exactly this and settled on one kernel per image (see
prior art). The property we want, a kernel that can be replaced without
touching the sealed rootfs, is one neither side has today. This issue is
about getting it for composefs/UKI systems.
This is about build and publish time, not about swapping kernels on a running
system. The goal is that the rootfs container image is built, rechunked and
(for sealed images) digested once, and a kernel can then be produced or
replaced against it by a separate step or pipeline, for example by a kernel
team that publishes kernel-only OCI images.
Today the kernel, the initramfs and /usr/lib/modules/<kver> all live in the
container image, and the UKI pins that image with composefs=<digest>, so any
kernel change means a new image build.
Use cases:
- shipping a kernel CVE fix without rebuilding and re-rechunking every derived
image - building several kernel flavors (debug, hardware enablement, vendor kernel)
from one rootfs - letting a kernel be built by a different pipeline than the rootfs, as
Dakota does with its kernel-only OCI images (see prior art)
What works today
Since #2185 the vmlinuz and initramfs can come from outside the rootfs
(bootc container split-kernel-and-rootfs, bootc container ukify --kernel-dir). So a per-kernel derived build is already possible:
FROM rootfs-rechunked AS base
FROM base AS with-kernel
COPY --from=kernel-image /usr/lib/modules /usr/lib/modules
RUN <build initramfs>
# ... compute digest, bootc container ukify --kernel-dir, sign, copy UKI back
The rootfs layers are shared, so the registry and the client dedup them. What
this does not give us:
- A stable rootfs digest. The modules go into the rootfs tree, so every
(rootfs, kernel) pair has its own composefs digest. Anything bound to the
rootfs digest (the sealing signature, attestations, the UKI cmdline) has
to be redone per pair. - An initramfs recipe. The initramfs mixes kernel modules with userspace
from the rootfs (systemd,bootc-root-setup, dracut modules). Someone
has to build it for each pair, and bootc has no documented way to do that
from a kernel-only image plus a rootfs. - Tooling. The flow above is a hand-written multi-stage Containerfile.
There is nobootc containercommand that takes a rootfs and a kernel
image and produces the bootable image.
Strawman
This isn't a proposal yet. It lists the pieces to get discussion going.
- A kernel-only OCI image contract.
/usr/lib/modules/<kver>/with
vmlinuz, the modules andmodules.*, optionally/usr/src/<kver>
headers, no userspace. Dakota's kernel image already has this shape.
bootc container lintcould check it. - An assembly command. Something like
bootc container assemble --rootfs <img> --kernel <img> --to <img>
(bikeshed) that copies the modules in, builds the initramfs against the
rootfs userspace, computes the digest, runsukify, and emits the final
image. This is the same step #1498 wants for sealing, with the kernel as an
input instead of taken from the rootfs. Signing stays a separate step as
#1498 discusses. - Keeping the rootfs digest stable. If we want the digest to be
independent of the kernel, the modules can't be part of the digested tree.
Options:- (a) Accept that the digest changes per kernel. Simplest; the cost is one
digest computation and one signing per pair. This is what the flow above
does. - (b) Ship the modules as a second composefs image with its own digest,
referenced from the UKI cmdline (e.g.bootc.kmods=<digest>), and have
bootc-root-setupmount it over/usr/lib/modules/<kver>after
verifying it. The rootfs digest is then kernel-independent, like
usrhash=. #7 (sysext frontend) would need the same "stack a second
verified image" mechanism. - (c) Keep the UKI generic and have it carry a persistent public key
instead of a digest; the rootfs digest is then shipped as a signed blob
that the initramfs verifies. This is the "persistent keypair" variant
already described indocs/src/relationship-particles.md, with the
downgrade caveat noted there.
- (a) Accept that the digest changes per kernel. Simplest; the cost is one
Open questions
- Is (a) enough? If the only cost of a kernel change is re-digesting and
re-signing, maybe the tooling (assembly command plus a documented kernel
image contract) is the whole feature and (b)/(c) aren't needed. - How to build the initramfs. Dakota's kernel image says "build the
initramfs in the consumer", so the assembly step needs the rootfs
userspace plus the kernel's modules. Because systemd-stub passes the
.initrdsections of addons to the kernel alongside the UKI's own initrd,
another option is a userspace initrd from the rootfs plus a modules initrd
from the kernel image. - Out-of-tree modules (nvidia, akmods, anything a derived image builds
against its kernel) sit in the rootfs and match only one kver. With (a)
they'd have to be built in the assembly step; with (b) they'd have to move
into the kernel image. Bluefin Server ships them as image-locked sysexts
(see prior art). - Combining separately signed pieces under Secure Boot. With (b) or (c),
anyone with write access to the ESP can combine independently signed
pieces, for example an old vulnerable kernel with the current rootfs. Do we
rely on SBAT generations or a TPM policy on PCR 11/12, or do we require (a)? - Scope. Should this cover only composefs, or the ostree backend too?
Starting with composefs/UKI seems simplest. - Relationship to sysext. Should the modules image in (b) just be a
bootc-managed system extension (#7)? Note the.sysext.rawimages the UKI
spec allows in$UKI.efi.extra.d/only apply to the initrd and are dropped
at switch-root, so they don't solve the host-side modules problem on their
own. systemd-sysext and confext are unsupported on bootc today (#2436).
Prior art
- Kernel-only OCI images.
ghcr.io/projectbluefin/dakota-kernel-ubuntu
(repo) is a
scratch image with just/usr/lib/modules/<kver>/(vmlinuz, modules,
modules.*) and/usr/src/linux-<kver>/headers, no userspace or
initramfs; the consumer is expected to build the initramfs. Dakota consumes
it at build time (BuildStreamdockersource with runtime/devel split
rules). This is the input the assembly step would take. - Kernel modules as a sysext. Bluefin Server ships NVIDIA and ZFS modules
as image-locked sysexts (VERSION_ID=<image-version>) under
/usr/lib/modules/<kver>/extra/<name>/, deliberately withoutmodules.*,
and rebuilds a depmod index under/runbeforemodprobe -d
(docs).
Option (b) would hit the same index problem. - UKI as a separate sysupdate transfer. Bluefin Server's
files/os/sysupdate.d/{10-usr,11-usr-verity,20-uki}.transferupdate/usr,
its verity partition and the UKI as three artifacts sharing one version.
They nonetheless settled on one kernel per image
(projectbluefin/server#249), because the modules live in/usr. - Bluefin Server's history is the same tension. Before
projectbluefin/server#262 the kernel was its own BuildStream element
owning/usr/lib/modules(the userspace import deleted that path), a
kernel.ymlworkflow exported a kernel-only artifact, and the UKI pinned
nothing (plain XFS root, nousrhash=), so a new kernel was just a new
UKI. #262 sealed/usrwith verity andusrhash=; the modules were now
inside the sealed tree, and #249 was closed as "one kernel per image".
Sealing is what couples the kernel to the rootfs, not the filesystem
layout. - Kernel-independent initrd. Bluefin Server builds its initrd from a
dedicated minimal userspace stack (initrd-stack.bst), not from/usr,
and copies in only the modules the kernel image provides
(bluefin-server-boot.bst). One answer to the initramfs question above. - Module trust in the kernel. Their module signing cert is compiled into
the kernel (SYSTEM_TRUSTED_KEYSvia a junction override) and the same key
signs in-tree and sysext modules. A kernel-only image carrying its trusted
cert lets out-of-tree modules be built by any pipeline holding the key,
independent of the rootfs.
Related
- #2185: removing the kernel and initrd from sealed images
(split-kernel-and-rootfs,ukify --kernel-dir) - #1498: sealed image build UX (build the UKI, sign elsewhere, seal)
- #2448: UKI addons support
- #7: frontend for systemd-sysext
- #2414: initramfs add-on entrypoint
- #2436: docs saying sysext/confext are unsupported
docs/src/relationship-particles.md, "ephemeral key" vs. persistent keypair
for binding the UKI to the root- composefs/composefs-rs#131: where the UKI goes, and excluding
/bootfrom
the digest
Assisted-by: AI
I reviewed it carefully.
- 主要语言
- Rust
- 星标
- 2.3k
- 派生
- 230
- 平均合并
- 2 天 2 小时
- 30 天内合并 PR
- 41
环境准备
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
bootc-dev/bootc 的其他 Issue
-
auto-updates fail with `opendir(boot): Operation not permitted` when /boot is a systemd automount that has idled out可能已有人在做 关联的 PR 仍在进行中或已合并。 未关闭triaged
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 70/100
bootc-dev/bootc#2402 · 9 条评论 · 1 个 reaction ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 68/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
install: improve error message when systemd-boot is selected without composefs backend可能重新可做 关联的 PR 已关闭且未合并。 未关闭
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 76/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
难度 4/5 1-2 天 新手友好度 49/100
bootc-dev/bootc#2585 · 1 条评论 · 1 个 reaction ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
难度 4/5 3-5 天 新手友好度 43/100
bootc-dev/bootc#2580 · 5 条评论 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
相似的 Issue
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 75/100
pedrovgs/UseCaseCoverage#23 ·
-
priority: low
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 64/100
storytold/photocraft#8687 · 1 条评论 ·
维护者通常 2 天内回复
-
area:kernel bug kernel-paused needs-triage
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 68/100
bherbruck/solvecraft#5055 · 2 条评论 ·
-
bug cli p3
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 76/100
维护者通常 3 天内回复
-
documentation good first issue help wanted
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复