All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=625465

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgkujQoAoM


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@401862  13889533  2843323  17  good
chromium@401996  13919286  3066701  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 625465

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests top_10_mobile_memory
Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_avg/http___m.youtube.com_results?q_science
Relative Change: 7.84%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6644
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9008185776077219648


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=4964609912471552

| 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

===== 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@401862  12778556  3108005  16  good
chromium@401996  14591073  2285558  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 625465

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests top_10_mobile_memory
Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_avg/http___m.youtube.com_results?q_science
Relative Change: 3.33%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6645
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9008140250549491056


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5850730921984000

| 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!

qyearsley@, can you follow up on this?

No ref build results, noisy graphs, one builder, bisect didn't confirm. Closing.