Make sure that detached trees don't receive mount propagation. Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> --- .../selftests/mount_setattr/mount_setattr_test.c | 17 +---------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mount_setattr/mount_setattr_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mount_setattr/mount_setattr_test.c index 8b378c91debf..b1e4618399be 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mount_setattr/mount_setattr_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mount_setattr/mount_setattr_test.c @@ -2079,24 +2079,9 @@ TEST_F(mount_setattr, detached_tree_propagation) * means that the device information will be different for any * statx() that was taken from /mnt/A before the mount compared * to one after the mount. - * - * Since we already now that the device information between the - * stx1 and stx2 samples are identical we also now that stx2 and - * stx3 device information will necessarily differ. */ ASSERT_NE(stx1.stx_dev_minor, stx3.stx_dev_minor); - - /* - * If mount propagation worked correctly then the tmpfs mount - * that was created after the mount namespace was unshared will - * have propagated onto /mnt/A in the detached mount tree. - * - * Verify that the device information for stx3 and stx4 are - * identical. It is already established that stx3 is different - * from both stx1 and stx2 sampled before the tmpfs mount was - * done so if stx3 and stx4 are identical the proof is done. - */ - ASSERT_EQ(stx3.stx_dev_minor, stx4.stx_dev_minor); + ASSERT_EQ(stx1.stx_dev_minor, stx4.stx_dev_minor); EXPECT_EQ(close(fd_tree), 0); } -- 2.47.2
