Re: [PATCH 4/4] selftest/arm64: Add MTE test config fragment

[Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>]

On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 04:33:26PM +0100, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> The arm64 selftest collection has no Kconfig fragment, so kernels built
> with the selftest requirements are not guaranteed to provide the support
> used by the MTE tests.
> 
> Add a fragment covering the userspace MTE and tagged-address ABIs, KSM
> and its sysfs interface, explicit HugeTLB mappings and their proc/sysctl
> interfaces, and tmpfs-backed file mappings.
> 
> Do not request NUMA solely for the optional KSM merge_across_nodes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@arm.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/arm64/mte/config | 8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/mte/config
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/mte/config b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/mte/config
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..8587ce70c294a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/mte/config
> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> +CONFIG_ARM64_MTE=y
> +CONFIG_ARM64_TAGGED_ADDR_ABI=y
> +CONFIG_HUGETLBFS=y
> +CONFIG_KSM=y
> +CONFIG_PROC_FS=y
> +CONFIG_SYSCTL=y

You may want CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL.

> +CONFIG_SYSFS=y
> +CONFIG_TMPFS=y

These are all covered by defconfig. Are these fragments still necessary?
Or are they supposed to work on custom configs? If the latter EXPERT may
be set, hence the PROC_SYSCTL above. You probably also need SHMEM.

-- 
Catalin