All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=605566

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgxP6EuAoM


Bot(s) for this bug's original alert(s):

chromium-rel-mac11

=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author robertphillips@google.com ===

Hi robertphillips@google.com, the bisect results pointed to your CL below as possibly
causing a regression. Please have a look at this info and see whether
your CL be related.


===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: completed


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : Switch SkColorFilterImageFilter over to new onFilterImage interface (again)
Author  : robertphillips
Commit description:
  
Back when this was originally reverted I was able to easily repro the perf regression locally. At ToT Skia/Chrome I can no longer repro the perf regression with this CL (in fact there is a modest perf improvement).

I propose landing this and then watching the Chromium perf bots.

BUG= 602300 ,598028
TBR=reed@google.com

GOLD_TRYBOT_URL= https://gold.skia.org/search2?unt=true&query=source_type%3Dgm&master=false&issue=1901513002

Review URL: https://codereview.chromium.org/1901513002
Commit  : 718a5adc6da857f08578cae434bcf81ea3f5aa3d
Date    : Tue Apr 19 17:21:03 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                Mean Value  Std. Dev.   Num Values  Good?
chromium@388334         17.361025   0.01965     5           good
chromium@388351         17.361221   0.016662    5           good
chromium@388360         17.403944   0.032524    5           good
chromium@388364         17.384783   0.00627     5           good
chromium@388364,skia@7831295c6317.38285    0.027926    5           good
chromium@388364,skia@718a5adc6d17.511085   0.020214    5           bad         <-
chromium@388364,skia@e05bbbba7917.515361   0.022195    5           bad
chromium@388364,skia@05db63b5fc17.522176   0.021204    5           bad
chromium@388365         17.497619   0.009801    5           bad
chromium@388366         17.523336   0.017945    5           bad
chromium@388368         17.474816   0.018094    5           bad

Bisect job ran on: mac_10_11_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 605566

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests smoothness.tough_filters_cases
Test Metric: frame_times/http___letmespellitoutforyou.com_samples_svg_filter_terrain.svg
Relative Change: 0.66%
Score: 99.9

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/mac_10_11_perf_bisect/builds/593
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9014758656167194272


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=605566

| 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!

Robert, it looks like the CL does regress some performance benchmarks. Could you investigate and either revert again if this is the case.

robertphillips@, gentle ping..

I think we're going to have to live with this one. The CL in question shuffles around how buffers are used in Skia. Although this results in a perf regression here it is balanced by a perf improvement in GPU rendering (see charts in  crbug.com/602300 ).

Moving this nonessential bug to the next milestone.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot

The metric has improved.  I think we can close this.