New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like █ or █) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 644190 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 642373
Owner:
█ l...@chromium.org
Last visit > 30 days ago
Closed: Sep 2016
Cc:
█ l...@chromium.org
fmea...@chromium.org
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

16.8%-40% regression in v8.google at 416217:416275

Project Member Reported by nikolaos@chromium.org, Sep 6 2016 
See the link to graphs below.

Comment 1 by nikolaos@chromium.org, Sep 6 2016 

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=644190

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg0ZSOoAsM,agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICg0YO2qQoM


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

chromium-rel-mac-hdd
chromium-rel-mac11
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Sep 6 2016

Cc: l...@chromium.org
Owner: l...@chromium.org

=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author lpy@chromium.org ===

Hi lpy@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 : [Tracing] Re-add trace-events used by metrics accidentally removed.
Author  : lpy
Commit description:
  
We removed some TRACE_EVENT0 instrumentation when we landed runtime call stats
tracing, however some of them are used in metrics, this patch adds these
TRACE_EVENT0 back.

BUG= 642373 
LOG=N

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2301743002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#39104}
Commit  : 7a7c0ec5af8092dabbbcd89d7427d7636e074f25
Date    : Thu Sep 01 20:08:38 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                       Mean     Std Dev   N  Good?
chromium@416225                18.0689  0.857407  5  good
chromium@416227                17.4127  1.77706   5  good
chromium@416227,v8@25504a220f  14.6582  2.66174   5  good
chromium@416227,v8@7a7c0ec5af  21.8968  0.49085   6  bad    <--
chromium@416227,v8@3b8ad45e0f  21.6483  1.46577   4  bad
chromium@416227,v8@bcbbfa7dda  21.8758  0.468735  5  bad
chromium@416228                21.9713  1.18714   5  bad
chromium@416231                21.6266  1.35383   5  bad
chromium@416236                22.1877  0.548168  4  bad
chromium@416246                22.1418  0.992015  6  bad

Bisect job ran on: mac_10_11_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 644190

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.google
Test Metric: v8_execution_cpu_total_avg/v8_execution_cpu_total_avg
Relative Change: 21.64%
Score: 99.0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/mac_10_11_perf_bisect/builds/873
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9002282658783613712


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6283372437962752

| 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 5 by l...@chromium.org, Sep 6 2016

Cc: fmea...@chromium.org
I think this is intentional, previously we removed some trace events from V8 accidently which made the graph drop, see Point ID: 411109.

In that CL, I added those trace events back, which basically made the graph back to the previous range.

I started a bisect job at point 411109.
Project Member

Comment 7 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Sep 7 2016

Mergedinto: 642373
Status: Duplicate (was: Assigned)

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


===== SUSPECTED CL(s) =====
Subject : [Reland][Tracing] Embed V8 runtime call stats into tracing.
Author  : lpy
Commit description:
  
Currently we have V8 RuntimeCallStats that is independently from tracing when
running d8 with flag --runtime_call_stats. This patch embeds V8 runtime call
stats into tracing, by having a global table of runtime call counters each
isolate, resetting the table each time we enter a top level trace event, and
dumping the table for each top level trace event. This will make trace file more
compat, as well as enable runtime call stats in tracing system.

This patch adds ~5% overhead to V8 when the category is enabled, we measure the
overhead by running a script when category is enabled.

BUG= v8:5089 

Committed: https://crrev.com/d014866173eaa2b548c566217b2c94b1d49385fa
Committed: https://crrev.com/1ca3b73bba4a7253ca8eeef39321d70e7d414331
Committed: https://crrev.com/3f936a5b17754783e92d2146eaf66c88a78ee45b
Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2187693002
Cr-Original-Original-Original-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#38270}
Cr-Original-Original-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#38314}
Cr-Original-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#38403}
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#38510}
Commit  : 7a3631e7e12fe0e5038d80c58f3f491c61977b95
Date    : Wed Aug 10 01:19:01 2016


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                       Mean     Std Dev   N  Good?
chromium@411063                35.5437  1.06994   5  good
chromium@411066                36.8949  1.096     5  good
chromium@411066,v8@5caabdd5cc  36.1784  1.50579   5  good
chromium@411066,v8@7a3631e7e1  31.3248  1.03942   5  bad    <--
chromium@411066,v8@400f03ab97  31.43    0.654149  5  bad
chromium@411066,v8@93809055aa  31.7753  0.603242  5  bad
chromium@411066,v8@ca9ec36eb5  31.6446  0.96982   5  bad
chromium@411066,v8@9e14155da9  31.5636  0.946197  5  bad
chromium@411067                31.4733  0.96759   5  bad
chromium@411068                31.3666  0.630836  5  bad
chromium@411069                31.3212  0.516746  5  bad
chromium@411075                31.6679  1.04581   5  bad
chromium@411086                30.985   0.718783  5  bad
chromium@411109                31.5702  0.858916  5  bad

Bisect job ran on: mac_hdd_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 644190

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.google
Test Metric: v8_execution_cpu_total_avg/v8_execution_cpu_total_avg
Relative Change: 11.18%
Score: 99.9

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/mac_hdd_perf_bisect/builds/774
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9002244397936976128


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6443856977985536

| 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, Sep 8 2016 


===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                       Mean     Std Dev   N  Good?
chromium@411063                36.7788  0.721012  9  good
chromium@411066                34.9317  4.07968   8  good
chromium@411066,v8@400f03ab97  31.4126  1.25563   9  bad
chromium@411066,v8@93809055aa  31.504   0.898258  8  bad
chromium@411066,v8@ca9ec36eb5  32.0399  0.861162  8  bad
chromium@411066,v8@9e14155da9  31.563   0.474583  9  bad
chromium@411067                30.7976  0.98746   8  bad
chromium@411068                30.0626  3.63793   8  bad
chromium@411069                30.3561  3.26633   7  bad
chromium@411075                31.4498  0.758634  5  bad
chromium@411086                28.6762  4.77833   4  bad
chromium@411109                30.6597  1.43872   6  bad

Bisect job ran on: mac_hdd_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 644190

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.google
Test Metric: v8_execution_cpu_total_avg/v8_execution_cpu_total_avg
Relative Change: 15.95%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/mac_hdd_perf_bisect/builds/777
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9002220694185006848


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=4992257353056256

| 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 10 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Sep 8 2016 


===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision                       Mean     Std Dev   N  Good?
chromium@411063                36.7788  0.721012  9  good
chromium@411066                34.9317  4.07968   8  good
chromium@411066,v8@400f03ab97  31.4126  1.25563   9  bad
chromium@411066,v8@93809055aa  31.504   0.898258  8  bad
chromium@411066,v8@ca9ec36eb5  32.0399  0.861162  8  bad
chromium@411066,v8@9e14155da9  31.563   0.474583  9  bad
chromium@411067                30.7976  0.98746   8  bad
chromium@411068                30.0626  3.63793   8  bad
chromium@411069                30.3561  3.26633   7  bad
chromium@411075                31.4498  0.758634  5  bad
chromium@411086                28.6762  4.77833   4  bad
chromium@411109                30.6597  1.43872   6  bad

Bisect job ran on: mac_hdd_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 644190

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests v8.google
Test Metric: v8_execution_cpu_total_avg/v8_execution_cpu_total_avg
Relative Change: 15.95%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/mac_hdd_perf_bisect/builds/777
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9002220694185006848


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=4992257353056256

| 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!
►

Sign in to add a comment