diff for duplicates of <20080730134011.24d10dfe.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 3af314f..cc80463 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -18,11 +18,3 @@ kobject_add()" should still be applied then I'd disagree.  Adding a
 GFP_KERNEL allocation into kobject_init() was a fairly significant
 backward step.  It's _good_ that kobject_init() can be called this
 early.  Let us strive to retain that robustness.
-
-
-
-
-_______________________________________________
-kexec mailing list
-kexec@lists.infradead.org
-http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 727fab0..1527527 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -5,10 +5,10 @@
  "Subject\0Re: [PATCH 2/2] firmware/memmap: Move kobject initialisation before kobject_add()\0"
  "Date\0Wed, 30 Jul 2008 13:40:11 -0700\0"
  "To\0Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>\0"
- "Cc\0x86@kernel.org"
+ "Cc\0linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org"
   kexec@lists.infradead.org
-  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
- " vgoyal@redhat.com\0"
+  vgoyal@redhat.com
+ " x86@kernel.org\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:14:24 +0200\n"
@@ -30,14 +30,6 @@
  "kobject_add()\" should still be applied then I'd disagree.  Adding a\n"
  "GFP_KERNEL allocation into kobject_init() was a fairly significant\n"
  "backward step.  It's _good_ that kobject_init() can be called this\n"
- "early.  Let us strive to retain that robustness.\n"
- "\n"
- "\n"
- "\n"
- "\n"
- "_______________________________________________\n"
- "kexec mailing list\n"
- "kexec@lists.infradead.org\n"
- http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
+ early.  Let us strive to retain that robustness.
 
-ecaea79c9a9fb6ffc17d61022ab39df6ffe7143eb15cc0aeab8429a34021edef
+9b7c3003e8e7beb8360de2c1b8f4259d7c90f5448bb1d69a239bcf71b414beb6
