On the EagerInitialization VM flag

[David Holmes]

On 20/12/2013 12:18 AM, Krystal Mok wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for the reply, David.
>
> When turned on, EagerInitialization is only applied to those classes
> that doesn't have a <clinit>()V, which is the case for quite some
> classes and interfaces. If implemented correctly, it's supposed to be
> semantically safe, because executing a non-existing initializer
> shouldn't cause side effects visible from the Java level (but doing
> linking and verification at the wrong time is potentially problematic,
> though).

Oops! My brain insisted this:

    // abort if the the class has a class initializer
     if (this->class_initializer() != NULL) return;

was there to skip if there wasn't a class initializer! So everything I 
said was wrong.

This would better be called EagerLinking as it has nothing to do with 
class initialization in the <clinit> sense.

I believe both loading and linking (and thus verification) can be 
performed eagerly.

David
-----

> I wasn't intending to purpose removing the flag and its implementation,
> but I'd agree if someone did make such proposal.
>
> - Kris
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 4:26 PM, David Holmes <david.holmes at oracle.com
> <mailto:david.holmes at oracle.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 14/12/2013 7:56 AM, Krystal Mok wrote:
>
>         Which is of course true, but not what I really cared about.
>         I'm just curious of the history of what that flag tried to do,
>         and then
>         why didn't it work. Any pointers or hints would be appriciated.
>
>
>     Given its age it is hard to say why it wasn't removed at the time
>     4292939 indicated. What it does is force class initialization at
>     class loading time. This might have been seen as useful at some
>     point but it violates the Java language semantics regarding when
>     class initialization can occur (eager loading is allowed, eager
>     initialization is not).
>
>     Given eager initialization is likely to break the carefully crafted
>     class initialization sequence I don't really see its utility - hence
>     the proposal to remove it.
>
>     David
>
>         Thanks,
>         Kris
>
>         On Friday, December 13, 2013, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>
>              Well, it’s a develop flag so it cannot be used in the
>         product anyway.
>
>              On Dec 13, 2013, at 11:27 AM, Krystal Mok
>         <rednaxelafx at gmail.com <mailto:rednaxelafx at gmail.com>
>              <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'rednaxelafx at gmail.com
>         <mailto:rednaxelafx at gmail.com>');>> wrote:
>
>                  Hi all,
>
>                  Does anybody still remember the history behind the
>                  -XX:+EagerInitialization flag? It'd be great if someone
>             still
>                  knows what the flag was for, and why it was to be removed.
>
>                  I saw this bug:
>             https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/__browse/JDK-4292939
>             <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-4292939>
>                  which stated that this flag was going away in "the next
>             build",
>                  but now it's still in the code.
>
>                  Thanks,
>                  Kris
>
>
>