All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=606269

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgpNu_twoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgpOzErgoM


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

chromium-rel-win7-x64-dual
chromium-rel-win8-dual

cc test owners.

bisect fails with "Failed steps failed gathering reference values.performance test 1 of 5 failed gathering reference values.reading chartjson results".

kicked another bisect because the blocking issue was fixed

Bisect results were not reported automatically for some reasons, and seems not finished correctly? (cc: prasadv)

chromium@389050 538.22595 2.058696 5 good
chromium@389056 552.208283 5.335888 5 bad

https://codereview.chromium.org/1899653002

Anyway, 389056 may be related to this regression. Let me assign yuzus@ for further investigation.

FYI, if you can help triage https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=606252 too, that's great.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1899653002 can impact the performance because it touches the most hottest code path - each DOM mutation.

However, 6.4% is a bit surprising to me. As I commented in the review, I am now working on this task, and can improve the performance, hopefully.

See https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=610961 for the context.

Do other bots have a performance regression?

https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=176991e5ce78d34c12546923b7951d932b4861f10c0365c16b075848ced2ccc0&start_rev=384881&end_rev=392869

Seems a kind of noise.  Let me close the issue.