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

[Jaroslav Bachorík]

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 4:23 PM Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 26/05/2020 13:59, Mario Torre wrote:
> > The patch looks good to me, just a minor nit (but I don't need a
> > re-review for this change) is to check the indentation of the
> > preprocessor:
> >
> > +    #if INCLUDE_JFR
> > +    // The VM creates & returns objects of this class. Make sure it's
> > initialized.
> > +    initialize_class(vmSymbols::java_lang_Class(), CHECK_0);
> > +    #endif
> >
> > Should indent at beginning of the line, like:
> >
> > +#if INCLUDE_JFR
> > +    // The VM creates & returns objects of this class. Make sure it's
> > initialized.
> > +    initialize_class(vmSymbols::java_lang_Class(), CHECK_0);
> > +#endif
> >
> > Likewise the block below that.
> >
> > We still need Andrew to approve before you can push though ;)
>
> It says here that
>
> "an agent can initialize JFR in response to the JVMTI VMStart event."
>
> Can't we test if this has in fact happened?

I guess so. But such a test is not a part of the original changeset.
Is it necessary to be extending the scope of the original patch
(https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/rev/127ca611f19b)?

-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
>