-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 11/03/11 17:40, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > On 11/03/11 18:30, Andrew Pinski wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Aldy Hernandez<al...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >>> These are known failures, mostly missed optimizations. >>> XFAILing them. >> >> I think you should file a bug about each missed optimization and >> reference the bug # in the testcase. This is so we don't lose >> track of the missed optimizations. >> >> Thanks, Andrew Pinski > > Sure, I can do that. > > What do you suggest, a bug report per failure with nothing but the > directory/name of the test? I'd say a bug report for each distinct failure. It can get awful confusing when there's multiple bugs in a single PR...
> Do you mind if I do this after the merge (if it gets approved)? > I'm trying to concentrate on merge blockers. XFAIL prior to merge, file bugs after is fine. Thanks, jeff -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOt1yBAAoJEBRtltQi2kC7a40H/jgJToPzkqC4ukuSKRY3rW86 htsGB7BveZm+9pcuMl5mHHfdtHaLsamCEx9Jt1DNIVZApCYAreAQTg/3kTQowXVy ATzXsGg0ymcgb89QwA9m92LKNswgHrTuVWRqbQMV/69cPC++C5RGo6dovn6RmLtm ok7YVDQX+4XUBqK4+C0GQn6T8uIAVuopa/qoIvUHrMWyoLeqJw/3hD2wve2WdZVv PrsVSI6l8sOJbO7e0Xa5eZRiqWs4nguO6ROXBZRCxI1uIXeaEa65kmfCFg2XrvsW Th037xmKs/Ua2mJ0sv0TFFBj0ckjGPxrrZ1CAsZX8oBdL7+F8M90RLy4VktKYXE= =430I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
