On 08/22/2012 01:47 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 04:27:08AM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote: >> +static int __init nlm_init(void) >> +{ >> + hash_init(nlm_files); >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +module_init(nlm_init); > > That's giving me: > > fs/lockd/svcsubs.o: In function `nlm_init': > /home/bfields/linux-2.6/fs/lockd/svcsubs.c:454: multiple definition of `init_module' > fs/lockd/svc.o:/home/bfields/linux-2.6/fs/lockd/svc.c:606: first defined here > make[2]: *** [fs/lockd/lockd.o] Error 1 > make[1]: *** [fs/lockd] Error 2 > make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... I tested this entire patch set both with linux-next and Linus' latest master, and it worked fine in both places. Is it possible that lockd has a -next tree which isn't pulled into linux-next? (there's nothing listed in MAINTAINERS that I could see). -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel