allocator/Windows: delete the old non-unified allocator-shim

base/security_unittest.cc

Index: base/security_unittest.cc
diff --git a/base/security_unittest.cc b/base/security_unittest.cc
index 519c997eb0a1486834ad35f59e55321787b7b68d..61c7cf91524d8555c4d18eef0c1733bccda83540 100644
--- a/base/security_unittest.cc
+++ b/base/security_unittest.cc
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
 #include <limits>
 #include <memory>
 
+#include "base/allocator/features.h"
 #include "base/files/file_util.h"
 #include "base/logging.h"
 #include "base/memory/free_deleter.h"
@@ -44,15 +45,10 @@ NOINLINE Type HideValueFromCompiler(volatile Type value) {
   return value;
 }
 
-// Tcmalloc and Windows allocator shim support setting malloc limits.
+// TCmalloc, currently supported only by Linux/CrOS, supports malloc limits.
 // - NO_TCMALLOC (should be defined if compiled with use_allocator!="tcmalloc")
-// - ADDRESS_SANITIZER and SYZYASAN because they have their own memory allocator
-// - IOS does not use tcmalloc
-// - OS_MACOSX does not use tcmalloc
-// - Windows allocator shim defines ALLOCATOR_SHIM
-#if (!defined(NO_TCMALLOC) || defined(ALLOCATOR_SHIM)) &&                     \
-    !defined(ADDRESS_SANITIZER) && !defined(OS_IOS) && !defined(OS_MACOSX) && \
-    !defined(SYZYASAN)
+// - ADDRESS_SANITIZER it has its own memory allocator
+#if defined(OS_LINUX) && !defined(NO_TCMALLOC) && !defined(ADDRESS_SANITIZER)

[gab, 2017/05/25 16:48:48]

Comment above says CrOS by this ifdef doesn't? Should this be OS_POSIX &&
!OS_MACOSX?

[Primiano Tucci (use gerrit), 2017/05/25 18:00:14]

there is no such thing like OS_CROS. OS_LINUX means "any linux desktop
environment", so Linux AND cros (but not Android)
Oh no, that will start pulling in OS_NACL, OS_IOS, OS_FUCSIA etc.
I once had a friend who wrote a CL in //base that ended up accidentally being
built as part of nacl. He has been sucked into a black hole and disappeared form
the galaxy :)

[gab, 2017/05/25 18:13:20]

OS_CHROMEOS :)
https://cs.chromium.org/search/?q=OS_CHROMEOS&sq=package:chromium&type=cs

but hadn't realized OS_LINUX included OS_CHROMEOS?

[Primiano Tucci (use gerrit), 2017/05/25 18:51:08]

^__^ "back in my days there was no OS_CHROMEOS" (insert old man meme here) 
Yeah that is just tied to__linux__ which any Linux-based desktop toolchain sets.

I'm fact there are a bunch of if defined(Os_linux)  && !is_chromeos around the
codebase for that reason  

 #define MALLOC_OVERFLOW_TEST(function) function
 #else
 #define MALLOC_OVERFLOW_TEST(function) DISABLED_##function