All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=611454

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg9Li2tgoM


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

chromium-rel-win7-gpu-ati

===== 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@392621  3.89438  0.232877  18  good
chromium@392676  3.9772   0.29576   18  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64ati_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 611454

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests memory.long_running_idle_gmail_background_tbmv2
Test Metric: Idle-v8-gc-scavenger_avg/Idle-v8-gc-scavenger_avg
Relative Change: 0.02%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64ati_perf_bisect/builds/1352
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9012849849648763344


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6433156610129920

| 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!

Moving this nonessential bug to the next milestone.

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

Assigning to the test owner, ulan. This seems super noisy, only happened on one bot, and the bisect failed to reproduce. WontFix?

Does ChromiumPerf/chromium-rel-win7-gpu-ati have the same hardware and OS as winx64ati_perf_bisect?

I started bisect with larger range. It is strange that the bot cannot reproduce the good result.

ulan: yes, they do have the same hardware. Since the test is noisy, it's possible there was a regression but the dashboard pinpointed the wrong range. I re-ran with an expanded range here: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9008603380677459904

Trying a wider bisect.

This issue has been moved once and is lower than Pri-1. Removing the milestone.

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

My bisect failed  with message
"Exception steps exception wiggling revision chromium@392629.gsutil ls exception wiggling revision"  (https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64ati_perf_bisect/builds/1400)

What does it mean?

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005788301037741728

No idea.  Lets try another bisect.

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005765730147095456

Bisect failed: Unknown
Failure reason: the build has failed.

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005671800860577376

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005032779373138224

Bisect failed: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64ati_perf_bisect/builds/1471
Failure reason: the build has failed.

Perf sheriff ping: reminder to follow up on possible performance issues

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9003762723034927456

===== 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@392621  3.87805  0.354155  18  good
chromium@392676  3.8463   0.265371  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64ati_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 611454

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests memory.long_running_idle_gmail_background_tbmv2
Test Metric: Idle-v8-gc-scavenger_avg/Idle-v8-gc-scavenger_avg
Relative Change: 4.75%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64ati_perf_bisect/builds/1520
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005788301037741728


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5211621375344640

| 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!

Bisect bot cannot reproduce the regression.