diff for duplicates of <20170404072922.GH16309@linaro.org>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 515b4b9..ff133a5 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -5,11 +5,11 @@ On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 10:21:34AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
 > > *regs)
 > > +{
 > > +#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE
-> > +       crash_save_cpu(regs, cpu);
+> > +???????crash_save_cpu(regs, cpu);
 > > +
-> > +       atomic_dec(&waiting_for_crash_ipi);
+> > +???????atomic_dec(&waiting_for_crash_ipi);
 > > +
-> > +       local_irq_disable();
+> > +???????local_irq_disable();
 > 
 > Shouldn't the above two be the other way round? Stop handling
 > interrupts *before* we tell the surviving CPU that we're done?
@@ -44,8 +44,3 @@ It would be great if you post your own patch for such a new interface.
 
 Thanks,
 -Takahiro AKASHI
-
-_______________________________________________
-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 52d6096..c9f5478 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -1,22 +1,10 @@
  "ref\020170403022139.12383-1-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org\0"
  "ref\020170403022440.12515-6-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org\0"
  "ref\01491211294.6020.21.camel@infradead.org\0"
- "From\0AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>\0"
- "Subject\0Re: [PATCH v35 08/14] arm64: kdump: implement machine_crash_shutdown()\0"
+ "From\0takahiro.akashi@linaro.org (AKASHI Takahiro)\0"
+ "Subject\0[PATCH v35 08/14] arm64: kdump: implement machine_crash_shutdown()\0"
  "Date\0Tue, 4 Apr 2017 16:29:23 +0900\0"
- "To\0David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>\0"
- "Cc\0mark.rutland@arm.com"
-  panand@redhat.com
-  ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org
-  geoff@infradead.org
-  catalin.marinas@arm.com
-  will.deacon@arm.com
-  james.morse@arm.com
-  bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com
-  sgoel@codeaurora.org
-  dyoung@redhat.com
-  kexec@lists.infradead.org
- " linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0"
+ "To\0linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 10:21:34AM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:\n"
@@ -26,11 +14,11 @@
  "> > *regs)\n"
  "> > +{\n"
  "> > +#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE\n"
- "> > +\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240crash_save_cpu(regs, cpu);\n"
+ "> > +???????crash_save_cpu(regs, cpu);\n"
  "> > +\n"
- "> > +\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240atomic_dec(&waiting_for_crash_ipi);\n"
+ "> > +???????atomic_dec(&waiting_for_crash_ipi);\n"
  "> > +\n"
- "> > +\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240local_irq_disable();\n"
+ "> > +???????local_irq_disable();\n"
  "> \n"
  "> Shouldn't the above two be the other way round? Stop handling\n"
  "> interrupts *before* we tell the surviving CPU that we're done?\n"
@@ -64,11 +52,6 @@
  "(Without any hardware, I can't implement/test this feature, anyway.)\n"
  "\n"
  "Thanks,\n"
- "-Takahiro AKASHI\n"
- "\n"
- "_______________________________________________\n"
- "kexec mailing list\n"
- "kexec@lists.infradead.org\n"
- http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
+ -Takahiro AKASHI
 
-358e5ffdeddfa79f10588a748a7f1b35c1364f8e89c143b03f12dbf1f848b186
+30b05a19880dab0a3ca82f9de4ebb867cce6503ec93645219c5df5b572c2dea1
