Not all test failures are alike. Some should be addressed urgently and some are important to address.
Interestingly, these two sets are DISJOINT.
That is, if a test failure should be tested urgently, it is seldom important. Those that should be fixed at any cost are seldom urgent (unless the team has really slacked).
How to determine which failure falls into which category?
Naturally, easiest to fix failures must be fixed urgently before the code moves too much.
On the other hand, if a failure is long standing, obviously a feature is broken and it is important to fix it.
As if the failure signal has to pass through filters, the outcome of an high pass filter will be urgent and the outcome of a low pass filter will be important.