Build and push multi-arch/os (amazon and windows, no debian) image manifest via Make rules

[wongma7]

Is this a bug fix or adding new feature? /feature

What is this PR about? / Why do we need it? Windows support merged recently but we haven't yet released a version with it. In preparation for that we need to build a multi-arch/os image manifest list with one of those manifests being a windows image.

The new Makefile copies heavily from the pause image Makefile which I found to have the prettiest patterns for achieving multi-arch build https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/v1.22.0-beta.0/build/pause/Makefile

I just made some minor adjustments for personal taste (like naming rules image instead of container). And, given a new enough docker cli we don't need to do the osversion workaround used there, we can just annotate manifests with argument --os-version.

In 1.2.0 release we decided to push only amazon linux based variant to GCR and ECR. So, this PR is also stopping the debian based build. (Decision came after sufficient debate which you can see by the silly amount of edits to this PR)

Before:

• amazon based image
• debian based image

After:

• amazon based image
• windows 1809 based image
• windows 2004 based image
• windows 20H2 based image

What testing is done?
build and push succeeded for my personal registry.

$ REGISTRY=280.dkr.ecr.us-west-2.amazonaws.com make all-push
...
...
...
$ docker manifest inspect 280.dkr.ecr.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/aws-ebs-csi-driver:asdf
{
   "schemaVersion": 2,
   "mediaType": "application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.list.v2+json",
   "manifests": [
      {
         "mediaType": "application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json",
         "size": 953,
         "digest": "sha256:1b1745bccf3fb07ee963bca0b7b11c59d350535e61b3390995c8c571aa46bb3a",
         "platform": {
            "architecture": "amd64",
            "os": "linux",
            "os.version": "amazon"
         }
      },
      {
         "mediaType": "application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json",
         "size": 953,
         "digest": "sha256:6475d343ac68bc3c796b93910a21932e462829a909cd91009e68715d5b5cfabf",
         "platform": {
            "architecture": "arm64",
            "os": "linux",
            "os.version": "amazon"
         }
      },
      {
         "mediaType": "application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json",
         "size": 956,
         "digest": "sha256:835c8ef03568dd3e62412159be7b60a28ee15c4ff5ad9c56939119d2060a4858",
         "platform": {
            "architecture": "amd64",
            "os": "windows",
            "os.version": "1809"
         }
      },
      {
         "mediaType": "application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json",
         "size": 957,
         "digest": "sha256:42105b8b21835cb93f3bc6ed9e05a656043a20eab97eb0a3edb64bd965065dc2",
         "platform": {
            "architecture": "amd64",
            "os": "windows",
            "os.version": "2004"
         }
      },
      {
         "mediaType": "application/vnd.docker.distribution.manifest.v2+json",
         "size": 957,
         "digest": "sha256:70ca1715db49c844e503ca45a1cd237ae7ae0c905276d03758021f2600c47563",
         "platform": {
            "architecture": "amd64",
            "os": "windows",
            "os.version": "20H2"
         }
      }
   ]
}

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: wongma7

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [wongma7]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[wongma7]

/hold

[wongma7]

/hold cancel

[nckturner]

Any reason to not use human readable here?

[wongma7]

it is the same, just shows offest instead of Z, e.g. 2021-08-05T21:02:49+00:00

[nckturner]

Is there a standard for this format of tag? If not we should make sure we come up with something across the provider-aws subprojects (i.e. just use the same format that you are using). This docker post shows a buildx example where the different platforms share a tag, but I'm not clear how pulling works in that case.

[wongma7]

the tag is only used for local build and adding the locally built image to the manifest list, it won't get pushed with the same tag as far as I can tell . At least, when I pushed it to public ECR as a test it did not expose these intermediary tags anywhere https://gallery.ecr.aws/b5w6x5z2/aws-ebs-csi-driver

[nckturner]

Ah, makes sense 👍

[nckturner]

/lgtm

[khushboo121]

@wongma7 which helm chart version multi-arch/os changes are going in, as I am currently running the chart version: 2.3.0, but ebs-csi-node ds is not running on arm64 node:

NAME           DESIRED   CURRENT   READY   UP-TO-DATE   AVAILABLE   NODE SELECTOR            AGE
aws-node       31        31        31      31           31          <none>                   409d
ebs-csi-node   28        28        28      28           28          kubernetes.io/os=linux   263d
kube-proxy     31        31        31      31           31          <none>                   409d```