New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 610994 link

Starred by 3 users

Issue metadata

Status: Available
Owner: ----
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 3
Type: Bug

Blocked on:
issue 593106



Sign in to add a comment

exclude_unwind_tables should not depend on is_chrome_branded

Project Member Reported by primiano@chromium.org, May 11 2016

Issue description

From BUILD.gn
# Omit unwind support in official builds to save space.
# We can use breakpad for these builds.
exclude_unwind_tables = is_chrome_branded && is_official_build

Feels weird to me that the presence of unwind tables depends on the branding. IMHO official build should reflect what we ship. We typically assume that the binary produces with official=true is representative of size and performance of the real one. This one makes it diverge, a non-chrome-branded binary is going to be << official one on android, where unwind tables contribute a lot.

In other words I think that  we should just
exclude_unwind_tables = is_official_build

 
Looks like the same was true in GYP as well. I think your proposal sounds reasonable.
https://codereview.chromium.org/1967103002 to turn that into action.

Components: Build
Labels: Build-Tools-GN
Blockedon: 593106
Labels: apk-size
Note: this makes our apk size graphs show libchrome.so as bigger than it actually is (due to unwind information not being excluded)
Labels: Performance-Browser
Labels: -apk-size binary-size
Not sure I understand #5, the problem today is all about NON-official builds? How can this make any difference for the real binary?
Are you suggesting that we are tracking a non-official binary in the size graphs? That sounds wrong regardless, as there are other build optimizations tied to is_official_build.
Labels: -Build-Tools-GN
I agree is_chrome_branded should not be relevant.
Status: Available (was: Untriaged)
I was wrong in #5. Turns out perf bots already build with is_chrome_branded=true, so this isn't hurting measurements at all.

Is there any reason not to fix this now then?
Re #10: I am super swamped. Would be great if somebody could take over my CL. thanks!

>Is there any reason not to fix this now then?
Don't think so.
Owner: agrieve@chromium.org
Owner: mikec...@chromium.org
Actually, assigning to mikecase@, since I think there are actually still some bots that require the microdump step (see blocking bug).
Labels: -binary-size Performance-Size
Project Member

Comment 15 by sheriffbot@chromium.org, May 10 2018

Labels: Hotlist-Recharge-Cold
Status: Untriaged (was: Available)
This issue has been Available for over a year. If it's no longer important or seems unlikely to be fixed, please consider closing it out. If it is important, please re-triage the issue.

Sorry for the inconvenience if the bug really should have been left as Available.

For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
This bug has an owner, thus, it's been triaged. Changing status to "assigned".

Comment 17 by agrieve@chromium.org, Jan 21 (2 days ago)

Labels: -Performance-Size
Owner: ----

Comment 18 by estevenson@chromium.org, Jan 21 (2 days ago)

Status: Available (was: Assigned)

Sign in to add a comment