New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 654454 link

Starred by 2 users

Issue metadata

Status: WontFix
Owner: ----
Closed: Oct 2016
Cc:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

15.5%-19.1% regression in tracing.tracing_with_debug_overhead at 423959:424022

Project Member Reported by qyears...@chromium.org, Oct 10 2016

Issue description

See the link to graphs below.
 
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 10 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@423958  30906.8  953.551  18  good
chromium@424022  30434.9  764.847  18  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 654454

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests tracing.tracing_with_debug_overhead
Test Metric: Max number of events per second_min/Max number of events per second_min
Relative Change: 1.93%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64nvidia_perf_bisect/builds/1904
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8999171163541346256


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5793242237370368

| 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 5 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 12 2016


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


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N   Good?
chromium@423958  7134695  1134180  12  good
chromium@423990  7259306  1356111  8   good
chromium@424006  7009927  1019187  8   good
chromium@424014  7068586  1188703  8   good
chromium@424016  6944159  455099   5   good
chromium@424017  8636376  1341478  5   bad
chromium@424018  8483955  1022942  8   bad
chromium@424022  8044418  219246   8   bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 654454

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests tracing.tracing_with_debug_overhead
Test Metric: Max event size in bytes per second_min/Max event size in bytes per second_min
Relative Change: 13.65%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64nvidia_perf_bisect/builds/1910
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8999076585102939360


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5879643691810816

| 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!
Status: WontFix (was: Untriaged)
Looks like a false alert, the ref moved at the same time.

Sign in to add a comment