Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
10.6% regression in angle_perftests/DrawCallPerf_d3d11_null/score on chromium-rel-win7-gpu-nvidia at 405551:405602 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionPerformance dashboard identified a 10.6% regression in angle_perftests/DrawCallPerf_d3d11_null/score on chromium-rel-win7-gpu-nvidia at revision range 405551:405602. Graph: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?masters=ChromiumPerf&bots=chromium-rel-win7-gpu-nvidia&tests=angle_perftests%2FDrawCallPerf_d3d11_null%2Fscore&checked=score%2Cscore_ref%2Cref&rev=405602
,
Jul 16 2016
=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author geofflang@chromium.org === Hi geofflang@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 : Clamp float32 depth data when uploading. Author : Geoff Lang Commit description: BUG=angleproject:1095 Change-Id: I4c272aef0f94733fc7b5297ddaa1fa2bc765fe62 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/360029 Reviewed-by: Corentin Wallez <cwallez@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Jamie Madill <jmadill@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Geoff Lang <geofflang@chromium.org> Commit-Queue: Geoff Lang <geofflang@chromium.org> Commit : 4107dda958cba1ceed0a58a2c0b5ff61f0bc33a5 Date : Wed Jul 13 21:28:00 2016 ===== TESTED REVISIONS ===== Revision Mean Std Dev N Good? chromium@405550 29699.2 148.794 5 good chromium@405576 29729.2 37.225 5 good chromium@405578 29685.0 105.586 5 good chromium@405579 29628.8 26.9574 5 good chromium@405579,angle@4107dda958 28128.8 40.9902 5 bad <-- chromium@405579,angle@28ff4fd867 28100.6 68.2847 5 bad chromium@405579,angle@b741c76144 27356.6 161.429 5 bad chromium@405580 26482.2 72.1644 5 bad chromium@405584 26505.2 224.079 5 bad chromium@405591 26528.6 137.616 5 bad chromium@405602 26489.8 83.8403 5 bad Bisect job ran on: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect Bug ID: 628654 Test Command: .\src\out\Release_x64\angle_perftests.exe --test-launcher-print-test-stdio=always --test-launcher-jobs=1 Test Metric: DrawCallPerf_d3d11_null/score Relative Change: 10.81% Score: 99.9 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64nvidia_perf_bisect/builds/1724 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9007057189871201312 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5814154829496320 | 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!
,
Jul 22 2016
geofflang, looks like your patch caused a regression. Could you take a look?
,
Jul 22 2016
Jamie, could this be from the WPO changes? The blamed CL should have no effect on this test, there are no depth float uploads.
,
Jul 22 2016
Don't think so, that was a separate regression, and much larger, and was caught correctly by the perf bisect bot. I agree the suspect CL seems innocuous. Try to repro locally, using scripts/perf_test_runner.py before and after your CL with Chromium closed, and fire off another bisect job. If both of those are inconclusive it's very difficult to understand, but we can maybe ask a guru like Bruce to help.
,
Jul 26 2016
Yes, the regression has started when I've landed my change to disable WPO for these builds, according to the dashboard we're back to the performance that we had on June 1st (before the CL that enabled WPO), so it's not really a regression, we're back to normal.
,
Jul 26 2016
Alright then. Let's close this out. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Jul 15 2016