* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-22 5:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-22 8:15 ` slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-22 5:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Hm, but the COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS variable is only used for communicating between
the driver and the linker, the options therein are individually passed to the
program execved?
You are maybe looking for the -f*-map options to take a file as input
containing multiple mappings?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-22 5:22 ` [Bug driver/111527] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-09-22 8:15 ` slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-16 9:52 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
` (8 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-09-22 8:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #2 from Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #1)
> Hm, but the COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS variable is only used for communicating
> between the driver and the linker, the options therein are individually
> passed to the program execved?
AFAIU the driver sets `COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS` variable and never unsets it. As a
result it affects all the `exevce() calls. Be it `cc1`, `as` or anything else
regardless of the fact if it uses the variable or not. `cc1` is probably the
first casualty.
As a simplistic example here we break `ls` with too large environment file:
$ COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS=$(printf "%0*d" 200000 0) ls
-bash: /run/current-system/sw/bin/ls: Argument list too long
> You are maybe looking for the -f*-map options to take a file as input
> containing multiple mappings?
`NixOS` is also occasionally hottong the same limit by passing too many include
an library paths:
-I/nix/store/hash1-foo/include
-I/nix/store/hash2-bar/include
...
-L/nix/store/hash1-foo/lib
-L/nix/store/hash2-bar/lib
...
-Wl,-rpath,/nix/store/hash1-foo/lib
-Wl,-rpath,/nix/store/hash2-bar/lib
I wonder if we could solve all of these limitations here by at least avoiding
`COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS`.
But otherwise if generic fix is too invasive change then passing a mapping file
should do as well.
What would be an acceptable for of the file? A new option, like?
-fmacro-prefix-map-file=./foo
with entries of exactly the same form
$ cat foo
/nix/store/hash1-foo=/nix/store/00000000-foo
/nix/store/hash2-bar=/nix/store/00000000-bar
...
Or maybe reuse existing -fmacro-prefix-map= and use response-style file input?
Like -fmacro-prefix-map=@./foo.
clang would probably need the same handling if we were to extend the driver.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-22 5:22 ` [Bug driver/111527] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-09-22 8:15 ` slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-03-16 9:52 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
2024-03-16 9:53 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
` (7 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com @ 2024-03-16 9:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
Deepthi H <deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #3 from Deepthi H <deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com> ---
I have been investigating this issue further. Hence checking the source code
and debugging the gcc sources. However, I wasn't able to find where the
COLLECT_GCC_OPTION has been set to 128kb
I couldn't find it being set in gcc. Can you please let us know how can we
increase the limit of collect options?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2024-03-16 9:52 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
@ 2024-03-16 9:53 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
2024-03-16 20:18 ` slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com @ 2024-03-16 9:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #4 from Deepthi H <deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com> ---
I have been investigating this issue further. Hence checking the source code
and debugging the gcc sources. However, I wasn't able to find where the
COLLECT_GCC_OPTION has been set to 128kb
I couldn't find it being set in gcc. Can you please let us know how can we
increase the limit of collect options?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2024-03-16 9:53 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
@ 2024-03-16 20:18 ` slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-06 11:39 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
` (5 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-03-16 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #5 from Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Deepthi H from comment #4)
> I have been investigating this issue further. Hence checking the source code
> and debugging the gcc sources. However, I wasn't able to find where the
> COLLECT_GCC_OPTION has been set to 128kb
>
> I couldn't find it being set in gcc. Can you please let us know how can we
> increase the limit of collect options?
The 128K limit against a single environment variable is a linux kernel
limitation set by this define in include/uapi/linux/binfmts.h:
#define MAX_ARG_STRLEN (PAGE_SIZE * 32)
https://trofi.github.io/posts/299-maximum-argument-count-on-linux-and-in-gcc.html
has more words on that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2024-03-16 20:18 ` slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-06 11:39 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
2024-05-06 11:42 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
` (4 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com @ 2024-05-06 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #6 from Deepthi H <deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com> ---
Created attachment 58107
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58107&action=edit
workaround for gcc driver long argument list error
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-06 11:39 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
@ 2024-05-06 11:42 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
2024-05-06 16:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com @ 2024-05-06 11:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #7 from Deepthi H <deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com> ---
We've a solution for this issue.
When gcc/g++ is called using the @response-file.rsp syntax, gcc should forward
the argument to its subprocesses. Previously the files were expanded which
could lead to excessively long argument lists and 'cc1: execv: Argument list
too long' errors.
In particular, CMake and Ninja tend to create a lot of '-isystem' include
directories, requiring allowing the forwarding in spec files by using %@{i*}.
In xputenv method, If the ENV variable size greater then 128kb then we split
the ENV variable(i.e COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS) where each chunk will be 128kb in
length.
GCC passes the entire command line, including expanded @rsp-files to the
collect2 in environment variable COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS. This can exceed the build
environment's kernel's environment variable length limit. In this workaround,
environment variables longer than 128kb are split into multiple variables and
stitched back together in collect2.
The patch is attached here.
And, the patch output of the example code given in 'Description' as below:
=======
sunild@BFT-LPT-I-051:~$ $GCC_PATH/gcc -c a.c -DA=$big_100k_var
-DB=$big_100k_var -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/sunild/GCC_Driver/bin/home/sunild/GCC_Driver/build/bin/gcc
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/home/sunild/GCC_Driver/build
--enable-languages=c --disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 14.0.1 20240426 (experimental) (GCC)
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS_0='-c' '-D'
'A=00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS_1=000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS_COUNT=2
=======
Let us know your comments on this solution. Such a solution is acceptable to
change the gcc driver?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-06 11:42 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
@ 2024-05-06 16:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-05-15 10:58 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-06 16:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #8 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Deepthi H from comment #7)
>
> Let us know your comments on this solution. Such a solution is acceptable to
> change the gcc driver?
Seems better to place the arguments in a file instead and just pass around that
file name instead of passing all arguments via an env variable.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-06 16:02 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2024-05-15 10:58 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
2024-05-15 11:00 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
2024-05-18 21:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com @ 2024-05-15 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #9 from Deepthi H <deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com> ---
Created attachment 58212
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=58212&action=edit
With_Files_Workaround_for_GCC_ArgumentLongList
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-15 10:58 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
@ 2024-05-15 11:00 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
2024-05-18 21:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com @ 2024-05-15 11:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
--- Comment #10 from Deepthi H <deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com> ---
As suggested, We've updated the patch to place the arguments in a file instead
of passing it from an env variable.
When the COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS is <128kb the env variable is used and when the
size >128kb arguments will be moved to a file.
In Collect2: We copy back the contents of the arguments from file into a buffer
and pass it on to the Linker.
See the updated patch :
With_Files_Workaround_for_GCC_driver_LongArgumentList.patch
The output of the example program in descripton section as below:
=============================================================
$big_100k_var=$(printf "%0*d" 100000 0)
$<<GCC_PATH_With_Fix>>/gcc -c a.c -DA=$big_100k_var -DB=$big_100k_var -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=/home/sunild/Gcc_Driver_with_FILE/install/home/Gcc_Driver_with_FILE/build/bin/gcc
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../gcc/configure --prefix=/home/Gcc_Driver_with_FILE/build
--enable-languages=c --disable-multilib
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 15.0.0 20240513 (experimental) (GCC)
/home/Gcc_Driver_with_FILE/install/home/Gcc_Driver_with_FILE/build/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15.0.0/cc1
-quiet -v -imultiarch x86_64-linux-gnu -iprefix
/home/Gcc_Driver_with_FILE/install/home/Gcc_Driver_with_FILE/build/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/15.0.0/
-D A=00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
....
....
<<trimmed output>>
....
....
0 -D B=000000000000000000000000000...
....
....
<<trimmed output>>
....
....
00000000000 a.c -quiet -dumpbase a.c -dumpbase-ext .c -mtune=generic
-march=x86-64 -version -o /tmp/cc7Ox5mH.s
=============================================================
Please let us know this solution is ok.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [Bug driver/111527] COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early
2023-09-21 19:06 [Bug driver/111527] New: COLLECT_GCC_OPTIONS option hits single-variable limits too early slyfox at gcc dot gnu.org
` (9 preceding siblings ...)
2024-05-15 11:00 ` deepadeepthi98 at gmail dot com
@ 2024-05-18 21:33 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
10 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2024-05-18 21:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=111527
Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last reconfirmed| |2024-05-18
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Note using "/tmp/rsp.txt" is not acceptable at all since there might be a few
linking happening on the machine. You should use make_at_file (which will make
either a tmp file which will be deleted at the end compiling or an .args.N file
which can be looked at if used with -save-temps) instead from gcc.cc and then
pass the filename to collect2 as "@filename" and then inside collect2 expand as
needed.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread