On Tue, 18 Apr 2017, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 10:58:44AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: >> On Mon, 17 Apr 2017, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 08:13:43PM -0000, Patchwork wrote: >> >> == Series Details == >> >> >> >> Series: drm/i915: uninitialized value on error path (rev3) >> >> URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/23038/ >> >> State : success >> > >> > These patchwork emails are sort of useless. I wouldn't have sent the >> > patch if it couldn't compile which is basically all this is testing. >> > It's not exercising the failure path. >> >> Yeah, the CI is not smart enough to know that just by looking at the >> patch, so it'll test them all. ;) >> > > But could it just send responses if something fails? Or it could be a > much shorter email: > > CI test successful. > > Use X-mailer-blahblah to filter successful tests. > > We don't need to expose all the other internal information unless > something fails. Thanks, I passed on the feedback. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
