ci: add docker publish #21
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes include updates to the Changes
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 5
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
Dockerfile (1)
1-1: Pin the base image to a specific versionUsing a specific image digest or version ensures consistent builds and reduces the risk of unexpected changes due to upstream updates.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- .dockerignore (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/build_preconf.yml (1 hunks)
- Dockerfile (1 hunks)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
- .dockerignore
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint
.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml
21-21: the runner of "docker/setup-buildx-action@v1" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
24-24: the runner of "docker/login-action@v1" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
30-30: the runner of "docker/build-push-action@v2" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint
.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml
[error] 36-36: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml (2)
17-19: LGTM! Using latest checkout action version.
20-36: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion
⚠️ Potential issueUpdate Docker action versions and improve tag strategy
Several improvements are needed:
- Docker actions are using outdated versions
- Tag strategy could be more comprehensive
- Missing newline at end of file
Apply these updates:
- uses: docker/setup-buildx-action@v1 + uses: docker/setup-buildx-action@v3 - uses: docker/login-action@v1 + uses: docker/login-action@v3 - uses: docker/build-push-action@v2 + uses: docker/build-push-action@v5 with: context: . push: true tags: | ${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:latest - ${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:${{ github.sha }} + ${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:${{ github.sha }} + ${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:${{ github.ref_name }}Consider adding these improvements:
- Add platforms specification for multi-arch support:
platforms: linux/amd64,linux/arm64
- Enable build cache:
cache-from: type=registry,ref=${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:buildcache cache-to: type=registry,ref=${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:buildcache,mode=maxLet's verify the Docker Hub repository exists:
✅ Verification successful
Docker action versions should be updated, but multi-arch and caching suggestions need revision
The review comment's version update recommendations are valid, but some suggestions need adjustment:
The repository uses a multi-stage Dockerfile with cargo-chef for Rust, which already implements efficient caching. Adding registry-based caching might not provide significant benefits.
Multi-arch platform specification isn't necessary as the project appears to be a Rust binary targeting specific platforms through the Dockerfile.
Recommended changes:
- uses: docker/setup-buildx-action@v1 + uses: docker/setup-buildx-action@v3 - uses: docker/login-action@v1 + uses: docker/login-action@v3 - uses: docker/build-push-action@v2 + uses: docker/build-push-action@v5The tag strategy update to include
github.ref_nameis beneficial for better version tracking.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check if the Docker Hub repository exists and is accessible curl -s "https://hub.docker.com/v2/repositories/$DOCKER_USERNAME/helix" | jq -r '.name'Length of output: 126
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's verify if there are any other Docker-related workflows or configurations fd -e yml -e yaml . .github/workflows/ -x cat {} # Also check for Dockerfile to understand the build context fd Dockerfile . -x cat {}Length of output: 5531
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint
21-21: the runner of "docker/setup-buildx-action@v1" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
24-24: the runner of "docker/login-action@v1" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
30-30: the runner of "docker/build-push-action@v2" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint
[error] 36-36: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
zsluedem
force-pushed
the
docker-publish
branch
from
fb0cf18
to
a754424
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 10
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
crates/api/src/delegation.rs (1)
5-7: Add documentation for the DelegationContract struct.Consider adding documentation comments to explain:
- The purpose of this contract
- The role of delegation_contract_address
- Usage examples
+/// Represents a delegation contract that manages validator delegations. +/// +/// # Fields +/// * `delegation_contract_address` - The Ethereum address where the delegation contract is deployed pub struct DelegationContract { delegation_contract_address: Address, }crates/api/Cargo.toml (1)
43-43: Consider using workspace-level version management.While the dependency addition is well-organized and justified for the new delegation contract functionality, consider moving the version specification to the workspace-level
Cargo.tomlfor consistent dependency management across the workspace, similar to other dependencies.Apply this change in the workspace root's
Cargo.toml:[workspace.dependencies] alloy-sol-types = "0.8.8"Then update this dependency to use workspace inheritance:
-alloy-sol-types = "0.8.8" +alloy-sol-types.workspace = truecrates/common/src/config.rs (1)
103-113: Add documentation for ExecutionClientConfig.While the implementation is correct, consider adding documentation comments to explain:
- The purpose of this configuration
- The expected URL format
- Any specific requirements or limitations
Example documentation:
/// Configuration for connecting to Ethereum execution clients /// /// The URL should point to a JSON-RPC endpoint (default: http://localhost:8545) #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize, Clone, Debug)] pub struct ExecutionClientConfig { // ... rest of the implementation }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (1)
Cargo.lockis excluded by!**/*.lock
📒 Files selected for processing (10)
- .dockerignore (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/build_preconf.yml (1 hunks)
- Dockerfile (1 hunks)
- crates/api/Cargo.toml (1 hunks)
- crates/api/src/delegation.rs (1 hunks)
- crates/api/src/lib.rs (1 hunks)
- crates/api/src/proposer/api.rs (5 hunks)
- crates/api/src/router.rs (1 hunks)
- crates/common/src/api/constraints_api.rs (2 hunks)
- crates/common/src/config.rs (3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- .dockerignore
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint
.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml
23-23: the runner of "docker/setup-buildx-action@v1" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
26-26: the runner of "docker/login-action@v1" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
32-32: the runner of "docker/build-push-action@v2" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint
.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml
[error] 38-38: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
🔇 Additional comments (13)
crates/api/src/lib.rs (1)
5-5: PR scope appears to exceed what's suggested by the title.While the PR is titled "ci: add docker publish", this change introduces a new public API module with significant functionality around delegation contracts. Consider:
- Updating the PR title and description to reflect these API changes
- Splitting this into separate PRs: one for CI/Docker changes and another for API changes
- Adding more context about the delegation feature in the PR description
This will help reviewers better understand and assess the changes.
#!/bin/bash # Check the extent of API changes vs CI changes echo "=== Files changed in this PR ===" fd -e rs -e yml -e dockerfile -e dockerignore . -x echo "{}"crates/api/src/delegation.rs (2)
1-3: LGTM! Imports are appropriate and well-organized.
10-12: Consider adding address validation in the constructor.The constructor accepts any Address without validation. Consider adding checks for:
- Zero address
- Contract existence at the given address
Dockerfile (1)
5-7: LGTM! Proper use of cargo-chef for dependency caching.The planner stage correctly implements cargo-chef's recipe preparation step, which will help optimize build times through better layer caching.
.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml (2)
15-15: LGTM! Well-implemented job condition.The condition properly handles both direct pushes and merged PRs, ensuring the workflow runs at appropriate times.
16-16: LGTM! Appropriate runner choice.Using
ubuntu-latestis perfect for Docker operations.crates/api/src/router.rs (1)
94-96: Verify the impact of removing the ElectPreconfer route.The commented-out code removes the
ElectPreconferroute handling. This change could affect API consumers relying on this endpoint.Let's verify the usage and document any breaking changes:
Consider:
- Adding a deprecation notice if this is a permanent removal
- Updating API documentation to reflect this change
- If temporary, add a TODO comment explaining when this route will be re-enabled
Would you like me to help draft the documentation updates or deprecation notice?
crates/common/src/api/constraints_api.rs (2)
44-45: LGTM! Well-documented field addition.The addition of
proposer_pubkeyfield is well-structured and properly documented. This change improves the system by identifying proposers through their public keys rather than slots.
55-58: Verify the intentional use of same public key for different roles.I notice that both
proposer_pubkeyandpreconfer_pubkeyare initialized with the same public key fromduty.entry.registration.message.public_key. Please verify if this is intentional, as typically different roles (proposer vs. preconfer) might require different keys for security separation.✅ Verification successful
Let me gather more context about the preconfer election and validation logic.
Let me check the PreconferElection struct implementation and related validation.
Let me check the BuilderGetValidatorsResponseEntry to understand the registration message structure.
Based on the gathered context, I can now provide a final response:
Using the same public key for proposer and preconfer roles is the intended behavior
The code shows that the preconfer is elected/delegated for a proposer, and the same public key is intentionally used for both roles as part of the delegation process. This is evidenced by:
- The delegation contract logic that maps proposers to their elected preconfers
- The validation checks in the codebase that verify this relationship
- The consistent pattern of using the registration's public key for both roles throughout the codebase
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for any documentation or tests that might explain the relationship # between proposer and preconfer roles rg -g '!target' -g '*.{rs,md}' -i 'proposer.*preconfer|preconfer.*proposer'Length of output: 1742
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the validation logic and key usage ast-grep --pattern 'fn validate_set_constraints_request($$$)' # Check the PreconferElection struct definition and related code rg -g '!target' -g '*.rs' 'struct PreconferElection'Length of output: 190
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Get the PreconferElection struct implementation and context rg -g '!target' -g '*.rs' -A 20 'struct PreconferElection' # Check for any validation related to public keys rg -g '!target' -g '*.rs' -B 2 -A 5 'validate.*public_key|public_key.*validate'Length of output: 1790
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Check the BuilderGetValidatorsResponseEntry struct and its usage rg -g '!target' -g '*.rs' -A 10 'struct BuilderGetValidatorsResponseEntry' # Look for any registration message related code rg -g '!target' -g '*.rs' -A 5 'registration.*message|struct.*Registration'Length of output: 22522
crates/common/src/config.rs (2)
10-10: LGTM!The import of
Addressfrom reth_primitives is appropriate for Ethereum address handling.
25-27: LGTM! Verify configuration file updates.The new fields are properly added with default implementations for backward compatibility.
Let's verify if any existing configuration files need updates:
✅ Verification successful
Configuration changes are safe and no updates needed
The test configuration file
custom.yamlis a chain specification file containing network parameters and does not contain application-specific configuration. Since the new fieldsexecution_clientsandonchain_delegationare application configuration fields with default implementations, no existing configuration files need to be updated.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for yaml/yml config files that might need updates fd -e yml -e yaml | xargs rg -l 'execution_clients:|onchain_delegation:'Length of output: 74
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's first check if there are any yaml/yml files in the repository fd -e yml -e yaml # Then let's look for any config examples or templates fd -g "*config*.{yml,yaml}" # Also search for test configurations fd -g "*test*.{yml,yaml}"Length of output: 113
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Let's examine the content of the test configuration file cat crates/common/test_data/custom.yamlLength of output: 1305
crates/api/src/proposer/api.rs (2)
98-98:⚠️ Potential issueInitialize
delegation_contractto prevent runtime panicThe
delegation_contractfield is added toProposerApibut is currently initialized withtodo!(), which will cause a panic if accessed. Please provide a proper initialization fordelegation_contractto prevent runtime errors.Consider initializing
delegation_contractin thenewmethod with an appropriate instance:- delegation_contract: todo!(), + delegation_contract: Arc::new(DelegationContract::new(/* initialization parameters */)),Replace
/* initialization parameters */with the actual parameters required forDelegationContract::new.Likely invalid or redundant comment.
793-829: Commented outelect_preconfermethod may affect functionalityThe
elect_preconfermethod has been commented out, which removes the ability to elect preconfers. Confirm that this is intentional and that this change does not impact other parts of the application relying on this functionality.Run the following script to check for any remaining references to
elect_preconferin the codebase:This script searches for occurrences of
elect_preconferto ensure there are no unintended dependencies or references remaining.
zsluedem
force-pushed
the
docker-publish
branch
from
a754424
to
f8570a2
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
Dockerfile (1)
5-7: Consider expanding .dockerignore fileWhile the AI summary mentions that
targetis already in .dockerignore, consider adding more entries to exclude other unnecessary files from the build context:
.git.githubtestsdocs*.md.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml (1)
31-38: Enhance Docker image security with vulnerability scanningConsider adding security scanning to your Docker build process to identify and address potential vulnerabilities early.
Add Trivy scanning step after the build:
- name: Build and push Docker image uses: docker/build-push-action@v2 with: context: . push: true tags: | ${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:latest ${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:${{ github.sha }} + + - name: Run Trivy vulnerability scanner + uses: aquasecurity/trivy-action@master + with: + image-ref: ${{ secrets.DOCKER_USERNAME }}/helix:${{ github.sha }} + format: 'table' + exit-code: '1' + ignore-unfixed: true + vuln-type: 'os,library' + severity: 'CRITICAL,HIGH'This will:
- Scan for known vulnerabilities in OS packages and dependencies
- Fail the workflow on critical/high severity issues
- Skip unfixed vulnerabilities to avoid blocking on issues without available patches
🧰 Tools
🪛 actionlint
32-32: the runner of "docker/build-push-action@v2" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint
[error] 38-38: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (3)
- .dockerignore (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/build_preconf.yml (1 hunks)
- Dockerfile (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- .dockerignore
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 actionlint
.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml
23-23: the runner of "docker/setup-buildx-action@v1" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
26-26: the runner of "docker/login-action@v1" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
32-32: the runner of "docker/build-push-action@v2" action is too old to run on GitHub Actions. update the action's version to fix this issue
(action)
🪛 yamllint
.github/workflows/build_preconf.yml
[error] 38-38: no new line character at the end of file
(new-line-at-end-of-file)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
Dockerfile (2)
1-3: LGTM with existing suggestions!The base stage setup is correct, but please consider implementing the improvements suggested in the previous comments regarding version pinning and apt cache cleanup.
9-15: LGTM with existing suggestions!The builder stage implementation is correct, but please consider implementing the previously suggested build optimizations and security improvements.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
taiyibranch.Bug Fixes
Chores
.dockerignoreto exclude unnecessary directories from Docker context.