All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=623806

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgotGSoQoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgovmVpQkM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgor25rQoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgwqLKpAsM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgouLYoQoM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgoqbVrQoM


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

chromium-rel-win7-dual
chromium-rel-win7-gpu-intel
linux-release

Moving this nonessential bug to the next milestone.

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

Lan, can you follow up on this?

From the instructions (https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/tools/perf/docs/perf_regression_sheriffing.md):
"After your shift, please try to follow up on the bugs you filed weekly. Kick off new bisects if the previous ones failed, and if the bisect picks a likely culprit follow up to ensure the CL author addresses the problem. If you are certain that a specific CL caused a performance regression, and the author does not have an immediate plan to address the problem, please revert the CL."

 Issue 623805  has been merged into this issue.

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9006405255443701360

===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                       Mean       Std Dev  N  Good?
chromium@401867                111629926  8538010  5  good
chromium@401877                103451034  2734352  5  good
chromium@401882                111629926  7173364  5  good
chromium@401882,v8@8349651e06  103031603  1367176  5  good
chromium@401883                139731763  2273259  5  bad
chromium@401884                137844326  4168007  5  bad
chromium@401885                136586035  4154796  5  bad
chromium@401887                136586035  5211328  5  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 623806

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.infinite_scroll
Test Metric: memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_max/tumblr
Relative Change: 22.36%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1038
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9006405255443701360


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5031839052333056

| 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!

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005837453327645696

===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                       Mean       Std Dev  N  Good?
chromium@401867                111629926  8538010  5  good
chromium@401877                103451034  2734352  5  good
chromium@401882                111629926  7173364  5  good
chromium@401882,v8@8349651e06  103031603  1367176  5  good
chromium@401883                139731763  2273259  5  bad
chromium@401884                137844326  4168007  5  bad
chromium@401885                136586035  4154796  5  bad
chromium@401887                136586035  5211328  5  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 623806

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.infinite_scroll
Test Metric: memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_max/tumblr
Relative Change: 22.36%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1038
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9006405255443701360


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5031839052333056

| 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!

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005743081454952560

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

Hi verwaest@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 : Share SharedFunctionInfo between all functions created for a FunctionTemplateInfo
Author  : verwaest
Commit description:
  
BUG=

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2095673002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#37252}
Commit  : a7a9ac37d4639555ffd28e97988c1228ed2a6fff
Date    : Fri Jun 24 13:53:00 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                       Mean       Std Dev   N   Good?
chromium@401867                80801792   7184175   18  good
chromium@401877                80102741   9921624   18  good
chromium@401882                79124070   2631905   5   good
chromium@401882,v8@8349651e06  79333786   4101528   5   good
chromium@401882,v8@a933b7044a  74300621   5617471   5   good
chromium@401882,v8@a7a9ac37d4  94433280   1816187   5   bad    <--
chromium@401883                94223565   1148657   5   bad
chromium@401884                100095590  11332385  5   bad
chromium@401885                93594419   1875750   5   bad
chromium@401887                94345899   6105335   12  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 623806

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.infinite_scroll
Test Metric: memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_max/tumblr
Relative Change: 13.16%
Score: 99.9

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1057
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9006405255443701360


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5031839052333056

| 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!

Reassigning to cbruni who's taking over this part.

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

Friendly sheriff ping: Have you had a chance to look into this regression? Thanks!

back from vacation and trips, will start looking into this by the end of the week.
Chromeperf is currently not working...

cbruni, have you been able to investigate this yet? The regression is still present.

ping

Sorry for ignoring this, I will try to look into this next week.

Were you able to look at it a couple weeks ago? What's the ETA for finishing investigation?

Trying to repro this locally on a linux workstation I see the results we expected, but not the ones from the bots.
V8 rev a933b7044a is using more memory than a7a9ac37d4.

I'll postpone this until I get a windows machine to see what's going on.

Windows machine has arrived, waiting to complete all setup steps.

Looks like this slipped through the cracks; should we close?

ugh, totally forgot about this one. Will do another investigation on my windows box today.

yeah.. seems like I don't have the old graphs anymore, leaving me quite clueless what to investigate by now + I couldn't repro on this on linux in the first place.