All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=713101

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgIDggu-o6AkM


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

android-webview-nexus6

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8981888274647051536

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8981704973629369920

=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
Bisect failed for unknown reasons

Please contact the team (see below) and report the error.


Bisect Details
  Configuration: android_webview_nexus6_aosp_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : blink_perf.bindings
  Metric       : get-attribute/get-attribute


To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-webview --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests blink_perf.bindings

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8981704973629369920

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5901812344815616


| 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/8981537955521805488

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

Hi mstarzinger@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 : Michael Starzinger
  Commit : 1f3a863bbdb972f3314c9424ff6939152d4dd9ac
  Date   : Tue Apr 11 11:42:52 2017
  Subject: [turbofan] Fix traversal order of boilerplate objects.

Bisect Details
  Configuration: android_webview_nexus6_aosp_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : blink_perf.bindings
  Metric       : get-attribute/get-attribute
  Change       : 8.76% | 72.3848829301 -> 78.7233077683

Revision                           Result                   N
chromium@463582                    72.3849 +- 1.05862       6      good
chromium@463623                    74.0565 +- 4.13861       6      good
chromium@463634                    75.9414 +- 1.39716       6      good
chromium@463637                    76.4199 +- 2.38023       9      good
chromium@463638                    76.3947 +- 2.15896       9      good
chromium@463638,v8@b213f23990      76.4452 +- 0.737656      6      good
chromium@463638,v8@1f3a863bbd      78.3119 +- 0.686373      6      bad       <--
chromium@463638,v8@fc7c2c5535      77.6695 +- 0.611705      6      bad
chromium@463639                    77.5897 +- 1.12857       9      bad
chromium@463644                    79.1707 +- 1.01494       6      bad
chromium@463664                    78.7233 +- 0.780097      6      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-webview --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests blink_perf.bindings

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8981537955521805488

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5901812344815616


| 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!

Explictly assigning. A CL you landed tripped one of the speed metrics we measure in the lab. If this is the first time this has happened to one of your CLs, or if it's been a while, please read: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/speed/addressing_performance_regressions.md

We're looking for one of the following:
1. Justification via explanation
2. Plan to revert or fix
3. Angry rage throwing of equipment at my head

Just be aware that I'm trained in trumpet playing and First Aid and am not afraid to use it.

Note: This was a bulk edit message and not very personal.

Adding blink_perf.bindings author jbroman. Looks like the original CL author didn't respond to this bug and it's pretty old at this point. Should we close it?

Looks like this won't be followed up on.