Don't run memory-intensive tests on low-memory devices.

base/allocator/partition_allocator/partition_alloc_unittest.cc

Index: base/allocator/partition_allocator/partition_alloc_unittest.cc
diff --git a/base/allocator/partition_allocator/partition_alloc_unittest.cc b/base/allocator/partition_allocator/partition_alloc_unittest.cc
index 30a89226f2b34393d5ac8e5a72e5f2b887de880c..4081d857811178440822664e39acbfc943d78a6f 100644
--- a/base/allocator/partition_allocator/partition_alloc_unittest.cc
+++ b/base/allocator/partition_allocator/partition_alloc_unittest.cc
@@ -611,6 +611,12 @@ TEST(PartitionAllocTest, GenericAlloc) {
 // Test the generic allocation functions can handle some specific sizes of
 // interest.
 TEST(PartitionAllocTest, GenericAllocSizes) {
+  // TODO(crbug.com/678782): Where necessary and possible, disable the

[Primiano Tucci (use gerrit), 2017/01/06 10:58:36]

I don't think this is needed. If you look in the body of this test, I did
already add a narrower exclusion below only on the 512M part. According to
crbug.com/675255#c9:

"In all of these, PartitionAllocTest.GenericAllocGetSize and
PartitionAllocTest.GenericAllocSizes are passing now (whereas they were failing
100% before), so these I would say are fixed (Woo! Thanks!)."

So I'd partially revert this hunk to avoid losing unnecessary coverage.

[danakj, 2017/01/06 15:20:10]

Maybe we can move the TODO down there then

+  // platform's OOM-killing behavior. OOM-killing makes this test flaky on
+  // low-memory devices.
+  if (!IsLargeMemoryDevice())
+    return;
+
   TestSetup();
 
   void* ptr = partitionAllocGeneric(genericAllocator.root(), 0, typeName);
@@ -708,6 +714,12 @@ TEST(PartitionAllocTest, GenericAllocSizes) {
 
 // Test that we can fetch the real allocated size after an allocation.
 TEST(PartitionAllocTest, GenericAllocGetSize) {
+  // TODO(crbug.com/678782): Where necessary and possible, disable the
+  // platform's OOM-killing behavior. OOM-killing makes this test flaky on
+  // low-memory devices.
+  if (!IsLargeMemoryDevice())

[Primiano Tucci (use gerrit), 2017/01/06 10:58:36]

ditto, I added a narrower exclusion below on the part that triggers OOM

+    return;
+
   TestSetup();
 
   void* ptr;
@@ -1266,6 +1278,12 @@ TEST(PartitionAllocTest, LostFreePagesBug) {
 #if !defined(ARCH_CPU_64_BITS) || defined(OS_POSIX)
 
 static void DoReturnNullTest(size_t allocSize) {
+  // TODO(crbug.com/678782): Where necessary and possible, disable the
+  // platform's OOM-killing behavior. OOM-killing makes this test flaky on
+  // low-memory devices.
+  if (!IsLargeMemoryDevice())
+    return;

[Primiano Tucci (use gerrit), 2017/01/06 10:58:36]

Maybe add a LOG(WARNING) << "Skipping this test on this device because of
crbug.com/678782) so by looking at the buildbot logs one doesn't get the false
feeling that this is just working

+
   TestSetup();
 
   EXPECT_TRUE(SetAddressSpaceLimit());