[8u] RFR 8233197: Invert JvmtiExport::post_vm_initialized() and Jfr:on_vm_start() start-up order for correct option parsing

[Jaroslav Bachorík]

Gentle ping?

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 11:30 PM Jaroslav Bachorík
<jaroslav.bachorik at datadoghq.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 5:53 PM Jaroslav Bachorík
> <jaroslav.bachorik at datadoghq.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 3:35 PM Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 5/15/20 1:01 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
> > > > The patch is good to go for my side, we still need to wait for the
> > > > maintainer to change the status to jdk8u-fix-yes before you can push
> > > > though.
> > >
> > > I'm tempted to say yes. However, I get frightened whenever I see any
> > > change to HotSpot initialization code, particularly things that change
> > > the order in which classes are initialized. Can you make the early
> > > call to initialize_class(vmSymbols::java_lang_Class()) JFR-only?
> >
> > I can try that. Let me get back with the result.
>
> I put the early java_lang_Class initialization in `#if INCLUDE_JFR`
> block. The original java_lang_Class initialization location was
> enclosed in an inverted `#if INCLUDE_JFR` block to ensure the original
> behaviour if JFR is not enabled in build config.
>
> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jbachorik/8233197/hotspot/webrev.02/
>
> Thanks,
>
> -JB-
>
> >
> > -JB-
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Haley  (he/him)
> > > Java Platform Lead Engineer
> > > Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
> > > https://keybase.io/andrewhaley
> > > EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
> > >