All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=632721

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgxrD2ugkM


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

chromium-rel-win7-dual

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005796666241534176

===== 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@408251  18.5032  0.370351  18  good
chromium@408294  18.2546  0.352936  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 632721

Test Command: .\src\out\Release\performance_browser_tests.exe --test-launcher-print-test-stdio=always --enable-gpu
Test Metric: CastV2Performance_gpu_60fps/capture_duration
Relative Change: 0.99%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6756
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005796666241534176


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5798477653606400

| 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/9005541340593586816

Noisy graph, but it does seem to be a real regression.  Trying again with a very high iteration count.

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005521221235476432

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005430074847969568

Bisect failed: Unknown
Failure reason: the build has failed.
Additional errors:
The revision range could not be expanded, or the commit positions could not be resolved into commit hashes.

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9004794007318526992

===== 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@408251  18.3875  0.319684  18  good
chromium@408294  18.2477  0.358672  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: win_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 632721

Test Command: .\src\out\Release\performance_browser_tests.exe --test-launcher-print-test-stdio=always --enable-gpu
Test Metric: CastV2Performance_gpu_60fps/capture_duration
Relative Change: 0.13%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/win_perf_bisect/builds/6785
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005430074847969568


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5820809872932864

| 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!

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

The graph shows the metric has partially recovered since, the net regression remaining seems seems smaller than the noise in the trace so I doubt we'd be able to find a culprit.