All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=626600

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgsqz-uAkM


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

chromium-rel-win8-dual

===== 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@404120  6171192  33978.3  18  good
chromium@404155  6146279  25520.4  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_8_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 626600

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:allocated_objects_size_avg/http___en.m.wikipedia.org_wiki_Science
Relative Change: 0.18%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_8_perf_bisect/builds/2016
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9007717247907664736


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5884284615786496

| 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!

Trying another bisect.

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9007039488672194672

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9007039483408771728

Sent some bisects. The bimodality of some of those graphs worries me.

===== 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@404120  6170226  44912.6  18  good
chromium@404155  6171846  46826.8  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_8_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 626600

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:allocated_objects_size_avg/http___en.m.wikipedia.org_wiki_Science
Relative Change: 0.03%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_8_perf_bisect/builds/2040
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9007039488672194672


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5321575901954048

| 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


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : Remove constructor from remaining functions that aren't constructors
Author  : jochen
Commit description:
  
BUG= 625823 
R=haraken@chromium.org,pfeldman@chromium.org

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2124183003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#404137}
Commit  : 587b0b37724cdfc0eec5ed091b94eb8276bc05ce
Date    : Thu Jul 07 12:35:31 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N  Good?
chromium@404125  9400135  139031   5  good
chromium@404134  9512657  201516   5  good
chromium@404136  9422696  239338   5  good
chromium@404137  8015831  95968.8  5  bad    <--
chromium@404140  8094533  101758   5  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 626600

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --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___www.baidu.com_s?word_google
Relative Change: 13.89%
Score: 99.9

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1023
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9007039483408771728


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5647030756573184

| 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!