New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 633036 link

Starred by 2 users
Status: Fixed
Owner:
wangxianzhu@chromium.org
Closed: Sep 2016
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

10% regression in media.android.tough_video_cases at 408193:408253

Project Member Reported by hubbe@chromium.org, Aug 1 2016 
See the link to graphs below.

Comment 1 by hubbe@chromium.org, Aug 1 2016 

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=633036

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgxvGSpAoM


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

android-nexus5

Comment 4 by qyears...@chromium.org, Aug 17 2016

Cc: wangxianzhu@chromium.org
We did get some bisect results before, but they weren't posted to the bug.

wangxianzhu@, does it seem like that CL might be related to this perf regression alert?


2016-08-01 17:15:11 
===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: completed


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : Fix issues of display item client cache flags
Author  : wangxianzhu
Commit description:
  
- Clear just created flag if the client is used in any display item
  or chunk. Don't set a chunk client to validly cached status because
  it doesn't have any validly cached display item (otherwise it should
  have been marked validly cached in the m_newADisplayItemList loop.

- Invalidate the client if it has any display items skipped cache.

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2185933003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408251}
Commit  : 080b866a4608e16edf4df4efefc023cbeebc90ca
Date    : Wed Jul 27 22:06:00 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N  Good?
chromium@408192  4618.89  160.237  8  good
chromium@408223  4537.06  83.8022  5  good
chromium@408238  4576.48  29.0291  5  good
chromium@408245  4543.17  55.5527  5  good
chromium@408249  4480.92  116.193  8  good
chromium@408250  4457.3   74.4879  5  good
chromium@408251  4713.01  117.742  8  bad    <--
chromium@408253  4745.47  60.0481  8  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus5_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 633036

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests media.android.tough_video_cases
Test Metric: buffering_time/crowd1080_vp9.webm
Relative Change: 1.28%
Score: 99.8

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/builds/3896
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005558419374871840


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5895828992950272

| 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!
Project Member

Comment 7 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Aug 17 2016 


===== 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@411979  4892.55  112.727  12  good
chromium@412026  4929.0   63.2207  12  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus5_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 633036

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests media.android.tough_video_cases
Test Metric: buffering_time/crowd1080_vp9.webm
Relative Change: 0.11%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/builds/4006
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9004056227029490576


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5314966828089344

| 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!
Project Member

Comment 8 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Aug 18 2016 


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


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : Fix issues of display item client cache flags
Author  : wangxianzhu
Commit description:
  
- Clear just created flag if the client is used in any display item
  or chunk. Don't set a chunk client to validly cached status because
  it doesn't have any validly cached display item (otherwise it should
  have been marked validly cached in the m_newADisplayItemList loop.

- Invalidate the client if it has any display items skipped cache.

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2185933003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408251}
Commit  : 080b866a4608e16edf4df4efefc023cbeebc90ca
Date    : Wed Jul 27 22:06:00 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N  Good?
chromium@408192  4672.71  103.856  6  good
chromium@408223  4571.91  71.794   8  good
chromium@408238  4602.96  137.777  8  good
chromium@408245  4665.78  51.8007  5  good
chromium@408249  4600.91  94.0068  8  good
chromium@408250  4516.5   60.1873  5  good
chromium@408251  4753.05  97.6995  8  bad    <--
chromium@408253  4846.54  147.593  8  bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus5_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 633036

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests media.android.tough_video_cases
Test Metric: buffering_time/crowd1080_vp9.webm
Relative Change: 4.16%
Score: 99.0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/builds/4005
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9004056726373963616


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5890510766473216

| 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!
Project Member

Comment 9 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Aug 18 2016 


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


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : Fix issues of display item client cache flags
Author  : wangxianzhu
Commit description:
  
- Clear just created flag if the client is used in any display item
  or chunk. Don't set a chunk client to validly cached status because
  it doesn't have any validly cached display item (otherwise it should
  have been marked validly cached in the m_newADisplayItemList loop.

- Invalidate the client if it has any display items skipped cache.

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2185933003
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#408251}
Commit  : 080b866a4608e16edf4df4efefc023cbeebc90ca
Date    : Wed Jul 27 22:06:00 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N   Good?
chromium@408192  4576.93  123.09   12  good
chromium@408223  4452.51  19.6828  5   good
chromium@408238  4543.69  88.0053  5   good
chromium@408245  4519.6   30.3264  5   good
chromium@408249  4456.77  92.076   5   good
chromium@408250  4511.83  70.0716  5   good
chromium@408251  4681.77  52.5701  5   bad    <--
chromium@408253  4767.01  110.574  8   bad

Bisect job ran on: android_nexus5_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 633036

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests media.android.tough_video_cases
Test Metric: buffering_time/crowd1080_vp9.webm
Relative Change: 2.92%
Score: 99.5

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus5_perf_bisect/builds/4007
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9004056212247982752


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5838138405027840

| 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!

Comment 10 by wangxianzhu@chromium.org, Aug 22 2016

Cc: -wangxianzhu@chromium.org
Owner: wangxianzhu@chromium.org

Comment 11 by wangxianzhu@chromium.org, Aug 23 2016

Status: WontFix (was: Assigned)
I think this is related to cache skipping for video timeline slider. r408251 fixed some issues of display items which skipped caching and may increase time to paint such display items. The root cause is  bug 484288 .

Also the performance regression reduce by about half recently.

Comment 12 by wangxianzhu@chromium.org, Aug 29 2016

Status: Assigned (was: WontFix)

Comment 13 by wangxianzhu@chromium.org, Sep 2 2016

Status: Fixed (was: Assigned)
The CL https://codereview.chromium.org/2297453002 which fixed  bug 484288  also restored performance.
►

Sign in to add a comment