All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=615828

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg7PvmpQoM


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

chromium-rel-win7-single

===== 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@396191  10.0386  4.14641  11  good
chromium@396393  11.2619  3.68155  14  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 615828

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.infinite_scroll
Test Metric: Animation-v8-gc-incremental-finalize_avg/discourse
Relative Change: 24.58%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6545
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9011239279015752912


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5841332212334592

| 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 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@396191  9.31912  5.18936  16  good
chromium@396393  10.6268  5.36437  12  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 615828

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.infinite_scroll
Test Metric: Animation-v8-gc-incremental-finalize_avg/discourse
Relative Change: 35.82%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6546
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9011239269701630944


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5813775702163456

| 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!

+hypayer any idea what might be happening here?
There are a bunch of independent (w.r.t. cl range) regressions on this benchmark which look similar, but happened at different times, for instance  Issue 616063 .
Bisect doesn't seem to be able to repro.
Is this benchmark using live sites or WPR?

It is using WPR, should be possible to bisect.

Alerts seems recovered as per http://test-results.appspot.com/revision_range?start=397454&end=397522

This looks like noise to me, and bisect also failed to reproduce a regression.