New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 680682 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: WontFix
Owner:
Closed: Apr 2017
Cc:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

1.3% regression in system_health.memory_mobile at 442200:442231

Project Member Reported by benjhayden@chromium.org, Jan 12 2017

Issue description

See the link to graphs below.
 
All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=680682

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgIDgwMLyoQoM


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

android-nexus6
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Jan 13 2017

Cc: gsat...@chromium.org
Owner: gsat...@chromium.org

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

Hi gsathya@chromium.org, the bisect results pointed to your CL, please take a look at the
results.


=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
Perf regression found with culprit

Suspected Commit
  Author : gsathya
  Commit : a5f3c4d10c4d710a602c910083409ee6c2e84b38
  Date   : Fri Jan 06 20:06:32 2017
  Subject: [promises] Move various promise reject functions to TF

Bisect Details
  Configuration: android_nexus6_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : system_health.memory_mobile
  Metric       : memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_avg/load_social/load_social_twitter
  Change       : 0.19% | 3399396.66667 -> 3405726.0

Revision                           Result                  N
chromium@442200                    3399397 +- 241.225      6      good
chromium@442216                    3399458 +- 4.89898      6      good
chromium@442220                    3399424 +- 112.143      6      good
chromium@442222                    3399458 +- 5.96285      9      good
chromium@442222,v8@2bbcedb54e      3417461 +- 153401       9      good
chromium@442222,v8@45c1188792      3403211 +- 42.5833      6      good
chromium@442222,v8@a5f3c4d10c      3405662 +- 352.761      6      bad       <--
chromium@442222,v8@0d72662400      3405726 +- 4.89898      6      bad
chromium@442222,v8@b5606fe07e      3405682 +- 367.265      9      bad
chromium@442223                    3405732 +- 43.2461      9      bad
chromium@442224                    3405668 +- 361.375      6      bad
chromium@442231                    3405726 +- 4.89898      6      bad

Please refer to the following doc on diagnosing memory regressions:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/memory-infra/memory_benchmarks.md

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=load.social.twitter system_health.memory_mobile

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8990637283252312944

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6439609153617920


| 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: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
This bug has an owner, but was in a state that our triage picked up. Marking as Assigned.
Status: WontFix (was: Assigned)
Closing as WONTFIX as this is because of moving builtins to CSA. See https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=695852#c14 for more information.

Labels: Performance-Memory Performance-Tradeoff

Sign in to add a comment