Martin Sebor via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> writes: > On 10/4/20 10:51 AM, H.J. Lu via Gcc-patches wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 5:57 PM Segher Boessenkool >> <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 12:21:04PM -0700, sunil.k.pandey via Gcc-patches >>> wrote: >>>> On Linux/x86_64, >>>> >>>> c34db4b6f8a5d80367c709309f9b00cb32630054 is the first bad commit >>>> commit c34db4b6f8a5d80367c709309f9b00cb32630054 >>>> Author: Jan Hubicka <j...@suse.cz> >>>> Date: Sat Oct 3 17:20:16 2020 +0200 >>>> >>>> Track access ranges in ipa-modref >>>> >>>> caused >>> >>> [ ... ] >>> >>> This isn't a patch. Wrong mailing list? >> >> I view this as a follow up of >> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555314.html >> >> What do people think about this kind of followups? Is this appropriate >> for this mailing list? > > A number of people routinely send emails similar to these to this > list to point out regressions on their targets. I find both kinds > of emails very useful and don't mind the additional traffic.
+1 FWIW. I think it's great that we have this kind of automatic CI, and this seems like a natural place to send the reports. Shovelling them into bugzilla is likely to create more work rather than less, especially since the fix turnaround should (hopefully) be short. Richard