Re: [RFC] should physmem be cgroup-aware?

Collin Funk wrote:
> Given that physmem doesn't account for cgroups though, 'sort' may
> allocate more than allowed by a cgroup, leading to a process being
> killed.
> ...
> I think that it would be nice to account for cgroup memory limits here

Sounds fine for physmem_available and physmem_claimable.

For physmem_total, I'm not sure. It is defined as "the total amount of
physical memory". So, either
  - leave physmem_total as it is, or
  - invent a new function physmem_in_container,
  - or add a 'bool in_container' parameter to physmem_total.

Bruno