[PATCH] tsan: fix PTRACE_ATTACH handling during stop-the-world

[Sergey Matveev]

================
Comment at: lib/sanitizer_common/sanitizer_stoptheworld_linux_libcdep.cc:125
@@ +124,3 @@
+        VReport(1, "Waiting on thread %d failed, detaching (errno %d).\n",
+            tid, wperrno);
+        internal_ptrace(PTRACE_DETACH, tid, NULL, NULL);
----------------
dvyukov wrote:
> earthdok wrote:
> > dvyukov wrote:
> > > earthdok wrote:
> > > > indent
> > > it is 4 spaces aligned
> > > in accordance with the Style
> > nope, that's only for those cases where even the first parameter is wrapped
> > otherwise you align to the first parameter
> ... and what if the wrapped argument does not fit onto line if you align it to the first arg?...
> ok, as you wish, done
> the style guide instruction that covers this seems to be "follow the style of existing code"
> and what if the wrapped argument does not fit onto line if you align it to the first arg?

Then you wrap at the opening bracket and indent with 4 spaces. It's pretty clear:

http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.html#Function_Calls

> Either write the call all on a single line, wrap the arguments at the parenthesis, or start the arguments on a new line indented by four spaces and continue at that 4 space indent. In the absence of other considerations, use the minimum number of lines, including placing multiple arguments on each line where appropriate.

Basically you can choose between

```
foobar(a,
       b)
```

and

```
foobar(
    a, b)
```

or

```
foobar(
    a,
    b)
```

But nowhere does it mention the middle ground of

```
foobar(a,
    b)
```

http://reviews.llvm.org/D7723

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  http://reviews.llvm.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/