diff for duplicates of <107cd9f7-69a3-dbb8-1a61-541172832a0c@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 0f3b690..fde186a 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -2,9 +2,9 @@
 
 On 05/08/2018 10:04 PM, J Freyensee wrote:
 >
->>           do {
->> -            tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP);
->> +            tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);
+>> ????????? do {
+>> -??????????? tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP);
+>> +??????????? tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);
 >>
 > I'm just curious why it was decided to still use tpm_msleep() here 
 > instead of usleep_range() which was used in the 2nd patch.
@@ -20,4 +20,10 @@ when timeout is needed in usecs.
 Thanks !!
 
 Thanks & Regards,
-     - Nayna
\ No newline at end of file
+ ??? - Nayna
+
+
+--
+To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
+the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
+More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 2151610..ad3a8d0 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -8,27 +8,16 @@
   "ref\0becb898c-b778-d104-5781-899599f536d4\@gmail.com\0"
 ]
 [
-  "From\0Nayna Jain <nayna\@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\0"
+  "From\0nayna\@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Nayna Jain)\0"
 ]
 [
-  "Subject\0Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] tpm: reduce poll sleep time in tpm_transmit()\0"
+  "Subject\0[PATCH v3 1/2] tpm: reduce poll sleep time in tpm_transmit()\0"
 ]
 [
   "Date\0Thu, 10 May 2018 18:11:50 +0530\0"
 ]
 [
-  "To\0J Freyensee <why2jjj.linux\@gmail.com>",
-  " linux-integrity\@vger.kernel.org\0"
-]
-[
-  "Cc\0zohar\@linux.vnet.ibm.com",
-  " linux-security-module\@vger.kernel.org",
-  " linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org",
-  " peterhuewe\@gmx.de",
-  " jarkko.sakkinen\@linux.intel.com",
-  " tpmdd\@selhorst.net",
-  " jgunthorpe\@obsidianresearch.com",
-  " patrickc\@us.ibm.com\0"
+  "To\0linux-security-module\@vger.kernel.org\0"
 ]
 [
   "\0000:1\0"
@@ -41,9 +30,9 @@
   "\n",
   "On 05/08/2018 10:04 PM, J Freyensee wrote:\n",
   ">\n",
-  ">> \302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240 do {\n",
-  ">> -\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240 tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP);\n",
-  ">> +\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240\302\240 tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);\n",
+  ">> ????????? do {\n",
+  ">> -??????????? tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP);\n",
+  ">> +??????????? tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);\n",
   ">>\n",
   "> I'm just curious why it was decided to still use tpm_msleep() here \n",
   "> instead of usleep_range() which was used in the 2nd patch.\n",
@@ -59,7 +48,13 @@
   "Thanks !!\n",
   "\n",
   "Thanks & Regards,\n",
-  " \302\240\302\240\302\240 - Nayna"
+  " ??? - Nayna\n",
+  "\n",
+  "\n",
+  "--\n",
+  "To unsubscribe from this list: send the line \"unsubscribe linux-security-module\" in\n",
+  "the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org\n",
+  "More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html"
 ]
 
-d7bfad18ce2b186d1a6842d850ddec62d3ec2a8b319d0dbb442fa29a174b4ce1
+566db75db82c3531e09031361802d71721137e1e8a7861bc61f9cef6fd2c70b8
