Propagate unknown --tool_flags to Dr. Memory as we do for Valgrind

Propagate unknown --tool_flags to Dr. Memory as we do for Valgrind
Fix a typo in the prev patch
Increase the number of stacktrace frames to 40

TBR=bruening
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=95810

[Timur Iskhodzhanov, 2011-08-08 13:38:03]

TBR

http://codereview.chromium.org/7585035/diff/1/tools/valgrind/valgrind_test.py
File tools/valgrind/valgrind_test.py (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7585035/diff/1/tools/valgrind/valgrind_test.py...
tools/valgrind/valgrind_test.py:715: parser._parser.add_option("", "--indirect",
action="store_true",
oops - this was copy-paste mistake

http://codereview.chromium.org/7585035/diff/1/tools/valgrind/valgrind_test.py...
tools/valgrind/valgrind_test.py:723: # args that are passed through to Dr.
Memory, but the
This is what --tool_flags was made for.
I've just forgotten to propagate it in the Dr. Memory runner

http://codereview.chromium.org/7585035/diff/1/tools/valgrind/valgrind_test.py...
tools/valgrind/valgrind_test.py:727: # through to valgrind_test.py so we don't
need to use --tool_flags
re: to use --tool_flags or not to use
If one makes a typo in some chrome_tests flag (e.g. --t0ol), the suggested
approach would propagate --t0ol to the tool and it would fail on load. This is
not very debuggable when you start up a large test like ui_tests with
BROWSER_WRAPPER where you don't see the tool output at all...
We've had this --tool_flags for 2+ years for Valgrind-based tools and looks like
only Chrome-Valgrind team ever needed it :)

You can re-formulate and put back the TODO if you still think we should do w/o
--tool_flags.