Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
374.4% regression in memory.top_10_mobile at 427713:427812 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Nov 2 2016
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8997111779701734752
,
Nov 2 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@427712 4691910 6419757 18 good chromium@427812 2294840 0.0 18 bad Bisect job ran on: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Bug ID: 661492 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests memory.top_10_mobile Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:gpu:effective_size_avg/foreground/https_mobile_twitter_com_justinbieber_skip_interstitial_true Relative Change: 0.00% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus6_perf_bisect/builds/2714 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8997111779701734752 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5061997526253568 | 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!
,
Nov 2 2016
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8997094737440907824
,
Nov 3 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@427712 2294840 0.0 18 good chromium@427812 2294840 0.0 18 bad Bisect job ran on: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Bug ID: 661492 Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=https.mobile.twitter.com.justinbieber.skip.interstitial.true memory.top_10_mobile Test Metric: memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:gpu:effective_size_avg/foreground/https_mobile_twitter_com_justinbieber_skip_interstitial_true Relative Change: 0.00% Score: 0 Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/android_nexus6_perf_bisect/builds/2722 Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8997094737440907824 Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you! https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=4605528402034688 | 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!
,
Feb 3 2017
These regressions happened before M56 branch. M56 is now in stable. These regressions made it to the stable channel. Marking wontfix.
,
Mar 14 2017
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by primiano@chromium.org
, Nov 2 2016