New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 606263 link

Starred by 0 users

Issue metadata

Status: WontFix
Owner:
Closed: Apr 2016
Cc:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression

Blocked on:
issue 606281



Sign in to add a comment

14.2%-14.4% regression in blink_perf.bindings at 389366:389374

Project Member Reported by toyoshim@chromium.org, Apr 25 2016

Issue description

See the link to graphs below.
 
All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=606263

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgpNzJrwkM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgpN-7tAoM


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

chromium-rel-win7-x64-dual
chromium-rel-win8-dual
Cc: yukishiino@chromium.org bashi@chromium.org
cc test owners
Blockedon: 606281
Cc: toyoshim@chromium.org
Owner: ----
Status: Available (was: Assigned)
bisect is failing with an error, "Failed steps failed gathering reference values.performance test 1 of 5 failed gathering reference values.reading chartjson results"
Owner: toyoshim@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Available)
kicked another bisect because the blocking issue was fixed
Project Member

Comment 5 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Apr 26 2016


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


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because The metric values for the initial "good" and "bad" revisions do not represent a clear regression.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

=== Warnings ===
The following warnings were raised by the bisect job:

 * Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                Mean Value  Std. Dev.   Num Values  Good?
chromium@389371         190.83103   2.402901    18          good
chromium@389373         192.492266  2.030978    18          bad

Bisect job ran on: win_8_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 606263

Test Command: python src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests blink_perf.bindings
Test Metric: dom-attribute-on-prototoype/dom-attribute-on-prototoype
Relative Change: 0.85%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_8_perf_bisect/builds/1922
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9014341522081569888


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5316042427990016

| 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!
Owner: yukishiino@chromium.org
The graph looks already recovered from the regression.
Thinking with this bisect results, I want to say this was a noise.

Let me assign test owner to ask the final decision.
Status: WontFix (was: Assigned)

Sign in to add a comment