RFR: 8374168: Resolve disabled warnings in JDWP agent [v5]

[Alex Menkov]

On Tue, 23 Dec 2025 19:21:19 GMT, Alex Menkov <amenkov at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> The fix resolves disabled warnings in debugger agent
>
> Alex Menkov has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   update for MS warning 5287 fix

With the latest version GHA Windows-x64 build still fails:
debugInit.c
d:\a\jdk\jdk\src\jdk.jdwp.agent\share\native\libjdwp\debugInit.c(184): error C2220: the following warning is treated as an error
d:\a\jdk\jdk\src\jdk.jdwp.agent\share\native\libjdwp\debugInit.c(184): warning C5287: operands are different enum types '<unnamed-enum-JVMTI_VERSION_1>' and '<unnamed-enum-JVMTI_VERSION_MASK_INTERFACE_TYPE>'; use an explicit cast to silence this warning
d:\a\jdk\jdk\src\jdk.jdwp.agent\share\native\libjdwp\debugInit.c(184): note: to simplify migration, consider the temporary use of /Wv:18 flag with the version of the compiler with which you used to build without warnings
d:\a\jdk\jdk\src\jdk.jdwp.agent\share\native\libjdwp\debugInit.c(186): warning C5287: operands are different enum types '<unnamed-enum-JVMTI_VERSION_1>' and '<unnamed-enum-JVMTI_VERSION_MASK_INTERFACE_TYPE>'; use an explicit cast to silence this warning
d:\a\jdk\jdk\src\jdk.jdwp.agent\share\native\libjdwp\debugInit.c(186): note: to simplify migration, consider the temporary use of /Wv:18 flag with the version of the compiler with which you used to build without warnings
d:\a\jdk\jdk\src\jdk.jdwp.agent\share\native\libjdwp\debugInit.c(188): warning C5287: operands are different enum types '<unnamed-enum-JVMTI_VERSION_1>' and '<unnamed-enum-JVMTI_VERSION_MASK_INTERFACE_TYPE>'; use an explicit cast to silence this warning
d:\a\jdk\jdk\src\jdk.jdwp.agent\share\native\libjdwp\debugInit.c(188): note: to simplify migration, consider the temporary use of /Wv:18 flag with the version of the compiler with which you used to build without warnings

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28937#issuecomment-3688076615