New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 623828 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 623174
Owner:
Closed: Jun 2016
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

4.9% regression in thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases at 401779:401800

Project Member Reported by lanwei@google.com, Jun 28 2016

Issue description

See the link to graphs below.
 

Comment 1 by lanwei@google.com, Jun 28 2016

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=623828

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgop33uwoM


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

chromium-rel-mac11
Project Member

Comment 2 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Jun 28 2016

Mergedinto: 623174
Status: Duplicate (was: Assigned)

===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: completed


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : Turn on enable begin frame scheduling by default
Author  : enne
Commit description:
  
This turns on --enable-begin-frame-scheduling[1] for all[2] platforms.
This was already on for Android so should only be a real change
for desktop / ChromeOS platforms.

Lots of cleanup can follow from this like removing all commit vsync /
authoritative vsync / CompositorVSyncManager things, but this is a
smaller patch to suss out any performance regressions.

[1] In this case, "begin frame scheduling" means browser->renderer
begin frame ticks instead of sending vsync information and having
a synthetic source on the renderer side.

[2] MUS is not hooked up to begin frame scheduling yet, but
mojo:mash_session in an "oxygen" build still works with this patch
applied.  Blimp also doesn't use begin frame scheduling and will
eventually just be transitioned to a synthetic begin frame source
for its engine half.

CQ_INCLUDE_TRYBOTS=tryserver.blink:linux_blink_rel

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/1939253002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#401796}
Commit  : f2d7f5e1891703ec4384ededd80f896816921204
Date    : Fri Jun 24 02:43:08 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev    N  Good?
chromium@401778  11.2087  0.091002   5  good
chromium@401789  11.1926  0.132928   5  good
chromium@401795  11.2662  0.0504048  5  good
chromium@401796  10.6505  0.0312014  5  bad    <--
chromium@401797  10.608   0.073696   5  bad
chromium@401798  10.6243  0.0734469  5  bad
chromium@401800  10.61    0.0387716  5  bad

Bisect job ran on: mac_10_11_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 623828

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases
Test Metric: thread_total_all_cpu_time_per_frame/thread_total_all_cpu_time_per_frame
Relative Change: 5.34%
Score: 99.9

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/mac_10_11_perf_bisect/builds/698
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9008648411808434368


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5838228305739776

| 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!

Sign in to add a comment