All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=609941

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg1MeJsgsM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg1NXqoAoM


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

android-nexus9
chromium-rel-win7-gpu-nvidia

===== 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     Std Dev  N   Good?
chromium@391734  340.363  81.3193  18  good
chromium@391753  318.613  120.947  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus9_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 609941

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests smoothness.gpu_rasterization.tough_filters_cases
Test Metric: frame_times/http___rawgit.com_WebKit_webkit_master_PerformanceTests_Animometer_developer.html?test-interval_20_display_minimal_controller_fixed_frame-rate_50_kalman-process-error_1_kalman-measurement-error_4_time-measurement_performance_suite-name_Animometer_test-name_Focus_complexity_100
Relative Change: 1.56%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus9_perf_bisect/builds/1778
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9013385394057662304


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5789577705422848

| 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!

Trying a new bisect.

===== 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     Std Dev  N   Good?
chromium@391700  350.949  76.3509  18  good
chromium@391840  348.117  104.928  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus9_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 609941

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests smoothness.gpu_rasterization.tough_filters_cases
Test Metric: frame_times/http___rawgit.com_WebKit_webkit_master_PerformanceTests_Animometer_developer.html?test-interval_20_display_minimal_controller_fixed_frame-rate_50_kalman-process-error_1_kalman-measurement-error_4_time-measurement_performance_suite-name_Animometer_test-name_Focus_complexity_100
Relative Change: 4.81%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus9_perf_bisect/builds/1782
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9013150908583646016


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5339955497271296

| 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!

Trying a std dev bisect.

=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author erikchen@chromium.org ===

Hi erikchen@chromium.org, 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 : [Reland 1] Pepper takes ownership of a mailbox before passing it to the texture layer.
Author  : erikchen
Commit description:
  
This CL makes three changes from the original.

1. Replace a call to std::remove_if() with vec.erase(std::remove_if(), ...).
This was a logic error in the original CL that caused a crash any time the size
of the buffer was changed. This CL also adds a test that catches this bug.

2. Add some simple reference counting to PepperPluginInstanceImpl to track the
fact that a cc::TextureMailbox may be passed to |texture_layer_| more than once.

3. The SyncToken signal is now processed in the context of its own message:
WaitSyncToken.

> I replaced the IPC message GpuCommandBufferMsg_ProduceFrontBuffer with
> GpuCommandBufferMsg_TakeFrontBuffer and GpuCommandBufferMsg_ReturnFrontBuffer.
> TakeFrontBuffer gives ownership of the front buffer to the client. When the
> client returns it with ReturnFrontBuffer, the command buffer may choose to reuse
> it.
>
> This means that pepper no longer needs to use
> SetTextureMailboxWithoutReleaseCallback.

BUG= 350204 ,  602484 
CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.chromium.linux:linux_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.mac:mac_optional_gpu_tests_rel;tryserver.chromium.win:win_optional_gpu_tests_rel
TEST=Run Chromium with the Pepper Flash plugin. Visit a site that supports Flash
video, such as http://vudu.com. Start playing a video, and then fullscreen the
video. Observe that Chromium does not crash. Please extensively test Chromium on
Flash 3D games and Flash video and make sure nothing else is working
incorrectly.
TBR=ccameron@chromium.org, bbudge@chromium.org, sky@chromium.org

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/1943513002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#391686}
Commit  : 4734ed1b6740b772201b8accb3e2bd88cdea5c99
Date    : Wed May 04 23:25:19 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N   Good?
chromium@391600  192.095  10.2036  8   good
chromium@391675  189.866  5.7206   8   good
chromium@391685  195.634  6.63154  12  good
chromium@391686  308.944  102.737  12  bad    <--
chromium@391687  330.327  86.3651  8   bad
chromium@391688  330.954  96.7661  8   bad
chromium@391690  295.644  90.1623  12  bad
chromium@391694  350.8    106.607  8   bad
chromium@391713  304.461  120.227  8   bad
chromium@391750  309.18   95.7073  8   bad
chromium@391900  376.021  91.207   8   bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus9_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 609941

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests smoothness.gpu_rasterization.tough_filters_cases
Test Metric: frame_times/http___rawgit.com_WebKit_webkit_master_PerformanceTests_Animometer_developer.html?test-interval_20_display_minimal_controller_fixed_frame-rate_50_kalman-process-error_1_kalman-measurement-error_4_time-measurement_performance_suite-name_Animometer_test-name_Focus_complexity_100
Relative Change: 85.85%
Score: 99.5

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus9_perf_bisect/builds/1785
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9013132710494337584


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5328652485525504

| 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!

Closing because this recovered when the culprit CL was reverted. Erik, it seems strange that your change regressed android. Any ideas what happened?

I also think it's strange that my change regressed Android. Not really sure how that's possible. Maybe there's conflation with another issue? Either way, we'll see after I reland my CL.