Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
1.6% regression in tab_switching.tough_image_cases at 392427:392493 |
||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
May 13 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 Std Dev N Good? chromium@392426 181.189 3.73019 18 good chromium@392493 180.529 3.37444 18 bad Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect Bug ID: 611788 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests tab_switching.tough_image_cases Test Metric: energy_consumption_mwh/energy_consumption_mwh Relative Change: 1.75% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6519 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9012759214728428368 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5794043464777728 | 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!
,
Jun 1 2016
Moving this nonessential bug to the next milestone. For more details visit https://www.chromium.org/issue-tracking/autotriage - Your friendly Sheriffbot
,
Jul 3 2016
Test result moved along with ref result. |
|||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by pras...@chromium.org
, May 13 2016