Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
2.1%-19.1% regression in smoothness.gpu_rasterization.tough_filters_cases at 385832:385875 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Apr 18 2016
,
May 6 2016
One graph recovered, one didn't. Trying another bisect on the one that didn't.
,
May 13 2016
Bisect job timed out after 24 hrs, but we get partial results. rschoen@: There is a huge improvement in the graph at Chromium Commit Position range: 387324 - 387345, not sure if we still need bisect on this? Partial results 2016-05-06 22:32:24 ===== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===== Status: started ===== TESTED REVISIONS ===== Revision Mean Std Dev N Good? chromium@385831 20.5412 0.147385 5 good chromium@385834 20.1501 0.419222 5 good chromium@385837 26.5063 0.770913 5 bad chromium@385843 26.245 0.638361 5 bad chromium@385853 26.6634 0.843888 5 bad chromium@385875 26.2661 0.876353 5 bad Bisect job ran on: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect Bug ID: 602326 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests smoothness.gpu_rasterization.tough_filters_cases Test Metric: frame_times/http___letmespellitoutforyou.com_samples_svg_filter_terrain.svg Relative Change: 27.87% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64nvidia_perf_bisect/builds/1631 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9013377743252082016 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5889728289701888 | O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq | X | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback, | / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect. Thank you!
,
Jul 8 2016
I think we can close this, the improvements seem to have stuck. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by rsch...@chromium.org
, Apr 11 2016