sys_info_linux: positive return value of MaxSharedMemorySize for 32-bit build on 64-bit host.

sys_info_linux: positive return value of MaxSharedMemorySize for 32-bit build on 64-bit host.

Previous implementation caused DCHECK when value exceeded 32-bit size_t.

BUG=

Committed: https://crrev.com/e6293f55b0e7abc73ee1925395c5f8b84a9b2e03
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#325034}

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-03-12 14:51:12]

ljagielski@opera.com changed reviewers:
+ jamesr@chromium.org

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-03-12 14:51:52]

Hi,
PTAL at my CL proposition.
Regards,
Łukasz

[jamesr, 2015-03-12 17:04:57]

jamesr@chromium.org changed reviewers:
- jamesr@chromium.org

[jamesr, 2015-03-12 17:04:57]

Please ask an OWNER of this code (I'm not one) to review.  A list of owners is
here:

https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/base/OWNERS

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-03-13 07:37:04]

ljagielski@opera.com changed reviewers:
+ mark@chromium.org

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-03-13 07:37:05]

Hi,
Could you PTAL at my CL proposition?
Regards,
Łukasz

[Mark Mentovai, 2015-03-13 11:59:23]

LGTM, but this function should perhaps return a uint64_t.

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-03-13 12:23:06]

Ok, I changed it to uint64 and started some try jobs (wasn't  sure which ones to
start).
Regards,
Łukasz

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-03-20 15:08:37]

On 2015/03/13 12:23:06, Lukasz Jagielski wrote:
> Ok, I changed it to uint64 and started some try jobs (wasn't  sure which ones
to
> start).
> Regards,
> Łukasz

Ok, I have no try job rights :) Could you please take a look at my changes
anyway?
Regards,
Łukasz

[Mark Mentovai, 2015-03-20 16:02:49]

Submitted to the try bots.

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-03-26 13:59:07]

On 2015/03/20 16:02:49, Mark Mentovai wrote:
> Submitted to the try bots.

Is this good to go? Bot failures seem unrelated to this patch.
Regards,
Łukasz

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-04-14 11:38:03]

On 2015/03/26 13:59:07, Lukasz Jagielski wrote:
> On 2015/03/20 16:02:49, Mark Mentovai wrote:
> > Submitted to the try bots.
> 
> Is this good to go? Bot failures seem unrelated to this patch.
> Regards,
> Łukasz

mark@, ping

[Mark Mentovai, 2015-04-14 12:42:50]

I don’t know, the bot logs are no longer available, but this still looks good as
far as I’m concerned.

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-04-14 12:47:26]

On 2015/04/14 12:42:50, Mark Mentovai wrote:
> I don’t know, the bot logs are no longer available, but this still looks good
as
> far as I’m concerned.

So, I'll try to integrate.
Thanks,
Łukasz

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-04-14 12:47:28]

On 2015/04/14 12:42:50, Mark Mentovai wrote:
> I don’t know, the bot logs are no longer available, but this still looks good
as
> far as I’m concerned.

So, I'll try to integrate.
Thanks,
Łukasz

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-04-14 12:47:39]

The CQ bit was checked by ljagielski@opera.com

[Lukasz Jagielski, 2015-04-14 12:47:39]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from mark@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1000933002/#ps40001
(title: "Removed useless file.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-14 12:47:56]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1000933002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-14 13:45:54]

Committed patchset #3 (id:40001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2015-04-14 13:46:59]

Patchset 3 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/e6293f55b0e7abc73ee1925395c5f8b84a9b2e03
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#325034}