Add WSLA runtime inspect schema and mapping #14132
Conversation
| wslaInspect.Id = dockerInspect.Id; | ||
| wslaInspect.Name = dockerInspect.Name; | ||
|
|
||
| // Remove leading '/' from Docker container names. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is already an ExtractContainerName function in this file. Perhaps you could alter it to fit this purpose, so we don't duplicate that logic.
OneBlue
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This approach LGTM, added a few minor comments
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| wsl::windows::service::wsla::WSLAContainerImpl::WslaInspectContainer wsl::windows::service::wsla::WSLAContainerImpl::BuildInspectContainer( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FYI: We can omit the full namespace here, because we have a using for WSLAContainerImpl
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Include Docker configured port bindings. | ||
| for (const auto& [containerPort, bindings] : dockerInspect.HostConfig.PortBindings) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would recommend directly reading from m_mappedPorts and generating the list from there, that should be simpler than having to read the bindings returned by docker and mapping those to our port mappings
|
|
||
| auto details = container.Inspect(); | ||
| VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(details.HostConfig.NetworkMode, "host"); | ||
| VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(details.NetworkMode, "host"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would recommend matching docker's JSON structure and keeping the HostConfig field here
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Include Docker configured port bindings. | ||
| for (const auto& [containerPort, bindings] : dockerInspect.HostConfig.PortBindings) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this would be misleading.
The HostPort returned from dockerInspect.HostConfig.PortBindings is not the same as the hostPort in m_mappedPorts. From the docker's perspective the host is actually the WSLA VM. The host in m_mappedPorts is the actual Windows host.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@OneBlue Do we need this code? Should we just return the port bindings in m_mappedPorts? Those are the only ones that have information about the real host port which is the only thing WSLA users care about.
Or do we want to create a separate field called something like VMPort and leave the HostPort entry null or empty for the ports that don't have host bindings?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed ! That was I was referring to this in this comment
I don't think we should return VmPort at all. These are implementation details that the caller shouldn't know about
| portBinding.HostIp = defaultHostIp(e.Family); | ||
| portBinding.HostPort = std::to_string(e.HostPort); | ||
|
|
||
| if (!hasBinding(portBindings, portBinding.HostIp, portBinding.HostPort)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe m_mappedPorts is guaranteed not to have duplicate entries. If it did, MapPorts() would fail.
Summary of the Pull Request
Update WSLAContainer::Inspect to return WSLA-schema JSON instead of raw Docker inspect JSON, preserve WSLA host-side port mappings when Docker reports empty bindings, and report host-side mount paths from WSLA state.
PR Checklist
Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Inspect now returns WSLA-schema JSON instead of Docker’s raw inspect output. Docker inspect data is mapped through the WSLA runtime schema before being serialized. Port bindings are added without overwriting existing WSLA host-side mappings, and mounts use WSLA host paths. This only affects the inspect output and does not change container runtime behavior.
Validation Steps Performed