50% regression on smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth in 441343:441726 on Android |
||||||
Issue descriptionmean_pixels_checkerboarded regressed by ~50% on Nexus 5X and Nexus 6: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=7bfb28f87cd369f7501ddce4c26d6b2946f7e8eddd1853e10162d8abe8f52a57&start_rev=440434&end_rev=445299 Kicking off bisects.
,
Mar 3 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8986128420550667952
,
Mar 4 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
Bisect failed unexpectedly
Bisect was aborted with the following:
Infra Failure: Step('device_status (3)') returned 1
Bisect Details
Configuration: android_nexus5X_perf_bisect
Benchmark : smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth
Metric : mean_pixels_checkerboarded/mean_pixels_checkerboarded
Revision Result N
chromium@441343 0.0307326 +- 0.0612337 14 good
chromium@441726 0.0475256 +- 0.0721127 10 bad
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 smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth
Debug Info
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8986128420550667952
Is this bisect wrong?
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5853287774945280
| 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!
,
Mar 4 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found but unable to narrow commit range Build failures prevented the bisect from narrowing the range further. Bisect Details Configuration: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Benchmark : smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth Metric : mean_pixels_checkerboarded/mean_pixels_checkerboarded Suspected Commit Range 48 commits in range https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+log/97a6fdc4e9b2194e4d5f245dc6704db72bf52bde..566236e262e49531224e263885e6208259725ab0 Revision Result N chromium@441343 0.0220171 +- 0.0156808 9 good chromium@441535 0.0269516 +- 0.0362414 9 good chromium@441583 0.0284915 +- 0.012385 6 good chromium@441584 --- --- build failure --- --- --- too many build failures to list chromium@441630 --- --- build failure chromium@441631 0.0432381 +- 0.0368545 14 bad chromium@441726 0.0441346 +- 0.0230693 8 bad 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 smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth Debug Info https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8986128448496073904 Is this bisect wrong? https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5886850260008960 | 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!
,
Mar 4 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8986018998441351360
,
Mar 5 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found but unable to narrow commit range Build failures prevented the bisect from narrowing the range further. Bisect Details Configuration: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Benchmark : smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth Metric : mean_pixels_checkerboarded/mean_pixels_checkerboarded Suspected Commit Range 24 commits in range https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+log/97a6fdc4e9b2194e4d5f245dc6704db72bf52bde..21385c25732a75a1e7172089afb08285566471f3 Revision Result N chromium@441583 0.0226374 +- 0.0248714 7 good chromium@441584 --- --- build failure --- --- --- too many build failures to list chromium@441606 --- --- build failure chromium@441607 0.0436239 +- 0.0282813 9 bad chromium@441631 0.0429444 +- 0.0161666 6 bad 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 smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth Debug Info https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8986018998441351360 Is this bisect wrong? https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6463146992074752 | 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!
,
Mar 5 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8985928859197403456
,
Mar 6 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found but unable to narrow commit range Build failures prevented the bisect from narrowing the range further. Bisect Details Configuration: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Benchmark : smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth Metric : mean_pixels_checkerboarded/mean_pixels_checkerboarded Suspected Commit Range 12 commits in range https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+log/97a6fdc4e9b2194e4d5f245dc6704db72bf52bde..f6a0f4b7f8abe662390f61e1d5133a0894bb6080 Revision Result N chromium@441583 0.0196496 +- 0.0191583 6 good chromium@441584 --- --- build failure --- --- --- too many build failures to list chromium@441594 --- --- build failure chromium@441595 0.0407806 +- 0.0373329 9 bad chromium@441607 0.039359 +- 0.00866614 6 bad 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 smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth Debug Info https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8985928859197403456 Is this bisect wrong? https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5812761000411136 | 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!
,
Mar 6 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8985862948855065840
,
Mar 7 2017
=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author schenney@chromium.org === Hi schenney@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 : schenney Commit : d3ba7664a7ebc6e74861602eb9696c7ca0a4ed2e Date : Thu Jan 05 06:01:46 2017 Subject: Fix border radius on composited children. Bisect Details Configuration: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Benchmark : smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth Metric : mean_pixels_checkerboarded/mean_pixels_checkerboarded Change : 94.65% | 0.0217264957265 -> 0.0422905982906 Revision Result N chromium@441583 0.0217265 +- 0.0170529 6 good chromium@441589 0.0253952 +- 0.0219079 9 good chromium@441591 0.0239801 +- 0.0210076 9 good chromium@441592 0.0435869 +- 0.0309091 9 bad <-- chromium@441595 0.0422906 +- 0.0132384 6 bad 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 smoothness.key_mobile_sites_smooth Debug Info https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8985862948855065840 Is this bisect wrong? https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5837142456008704 | 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!
,
Mar 7 2017
This might be case where the perf regression is the price we have to pay for correctness, though it would be worth double-checking that the additional border-radius clipping here really does clip something. I also wonder if sunxd@'s work will help with reducing the perf impact.
,
Mar 7 2017
It does seem like it's my patch, because there is also a blip up when the original version was landed then reverted (Dec 12-13). We already check, in a slightly fast and dirty version, that the mask is actually clipping something. We could try to make a more precise test but I very much doubt that it will make a difference. I'll need to look at the sites in the test to see which are causing problems. There's another improvement I need to look into that might help, but that's more about memory than speed, I think.
,
Mar 7 2017
,
Apr 24 2017
,
Apr 28 2017
The Nexus 5x has reverted back to very low numbers, so no action there. The Nexus 6 has stayed where it was after this patch. We're not going to roll out the patch because it fixes a major problem. We're on the verge of landing a patch to improve performance of the masks introduced by my patch. So I think WontFix is the right strategy. |
||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Mar 3 2017