All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=670772

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgh-WupAkM


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

linux-release

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8994364125992740288

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


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N    Good?
chromium@433543  1.95199  12.9285  205  good
chromium@434621  1.95885  13.0533  205  bad

Bisect job ran on: linux_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 670772

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests rasterize_and_record_micro.key_mobile_sites
Test Metric: rasterize_time/rasterize_time
Relative Change: 0.35%

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/linux_perf_bisect/builds/6876
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8994364125992740288


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6133817427886080

| 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/8994155339715540448

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


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N    Good?
chromium@433543  2.1879   14.4914  205  good
chromium@434621  2.19739  14.6016  205  bad

Bisect job ran on: linux_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 670772

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests rasterize_and_record_micro.key_mobile_sites
Test Metric: rasterize_time/rasterize_time
Relative Change: 0.43%

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/linux_perf_bisect/builds/6880
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8994155339715540448


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5219352385683456

| 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/8994061661113863072

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


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N    Good?
chromium@433543  1.95     12.8961  205  good
chromium@434621  1.95928  13.0344  205  bad

Bisect job ran on: linux_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 670772

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests rasterize_and_record_micro.key_mobile_sites
Test Metric: rasterize_time/rasterize_time
Relative Change: 0.48%

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/linux_perf_bisect/builds/6888
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8994061661113863072


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5801857157431296

| 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/8993985141696074656

One alert, one platform, no ref build results, so even thought this looks like a clear step it might end up not being due to a change in Chrome. Running another bisect job; if not reproduced, then this should be closed.

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


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N    Good?
chromium@433543  1.95125  12.9031  205  good
chromium@434621  1.95859  13.0204  205  bad

Bisect job ran on: linux_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 670772

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests rasterize_and_record_micro.key_mobile_sites
Test Metric: rasterize_time/rasterize_time
Relative Change: 0.38%

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/linux_perf_bisect/builds/6901
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8993985141696074656


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5257785464324096

| 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!

Closing it after 4th failed bisect based on #9

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8982651733931068784

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8982632399693206016

=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
NO Perf regression found

Bisect Details
  Configuration: linux_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : rasterize_and_record_micro.key_mobile_sites
  Metric       : rasterize_time/rasterize_time

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@433543      1.95125 +- 12.9031      205      good
chromium@434621      1.95859 +- 13.0204      205      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests rasterize_and_record_micro.key_mobile_sites

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8982632399693206016

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5257785464324096


| 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 Speed>Bisection.  Thank you!

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8982580366545636864

=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
Bisect was unable to run to completion

Please try rerunning the bisect.


If failures persist contact the team (see below) and report the error.


Bisect Details
  Configuration: linux_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : rasterize_and_record_micro.key_mobile_sites
  Metric       : rasterize_time/rasterize_time

Revision                           Result                     N
chromium@433543                    2.2814 +- 0.00524212       6       good
chromium@434082                    2.28717 +- 0.00455379      6       good
chromium@434150                    2.28496 +- 0.00475537      6       good
chromium@434184                    2.28844 +- 0.00414109      8       good
chromium@434189                    2.2924 +- 0.0614463        14      good
chromium@434189,v8@de330e13da      2.20271 +- 0.0129667       6       good
chromium@434189,v8@a29b658eec      2.20941 +- 0.00846054      6       good
chromium@434189,v8@491651792d      2.20164 +- 0.00378425      6       good
chromium@434190                    2.29567 +- 0.0132434       9       bad
chromium@434191                    2.32051 +- 0.0825333       6       bad
chromium@434193                    2.29312 +- 0.00595086      9       bad
chromium@434201                    2.29438 +- 0.0104355       9       bad
chromium@434217                    2.29937 +- 0.00790405      6       bad
chromium@434352                    2.29701 +- 0.00495112      6       bad
chromium@434621                    2.29315 +- 0.00855411      6       bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests rasterize_and_record_micro.key_mobile_sites

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8982651733931068784

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5219352385683456


| 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 Speed>Bisection.  Thank you!