New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like █ or █) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 713133 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 708578
Owner: ----
Closed: Apr 2017
Cc:
█ alexclarke@chromium.org
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

41.9% regression in memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2 at 461424:461523

Project Member Reported by alexclarke@chromium.org, Apr 19 2017 
See the link to graphs below.

Comment 1 by alexclarke@chromium.org, Apr 19 2017 

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=713133

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgIDgwsSwsQoM


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

chromium-rel-mac12
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Apr 19 2017 


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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: mac_10_12_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2
  Metric       : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:private_dirty_size_max/memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:private_dirty_size_max

Revision             Result                     N
chromium@461423      229292302 +- 18852607      21      good
chromium@461523      230776164 +- 15139228      21      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 memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8981887819065001984

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6363308191383552


| 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!
Project Member

Comment 5 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Apr 20 2017 


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

Error: INFRA_FAILURE

The bisect was able to narrow the range, you can try running with:
  good_revision: 95ffafca46c06954cf990170000fb7a6f6e00cfa
  bad_revision : 0672582d53d0b7f561d129e28a30d5ae5cf28605

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


Bisect Details
  Configuration: mac_10_12_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2
  Metric       : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:private_dirty_size_max/memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:private_dirty_size_max

Revision             Result                     N
chromium@461423      228098208 +- 9682123       14      good
chromium@461474      227731357 +- 7130824       14      good
chromium@461499      229940996 +- 10604762      21      bad
chromium@461523      231219099 +- 9584297       14      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 memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8981872980743321168

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6363308191383552


| 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!
Project Member

Comment 7 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Apr 21 2017 


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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: mac_10_12_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2
  Metric       : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:private_dirty_size_max/memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:private_dirty_size_max

Revision             Result                     N
chromium@461423      229889182 +- 14645157      21      good
chromium@461523      229607195 +- 14105888      21      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 memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8981743504485512624

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6363308191383552


| 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!

Comment 8 by alexclarke@chromium.org, Apr 21 2017 

There might be a regression lurking in there somewhere but I doubt the bots will find it.  Trying a wider bisect.
Project Member

Comment 10 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Apr 21 2017

Mergedinto: 708578
Status: Duplicate (was: Untriaged)

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

Suspected Commit
  Author : erikchen
  Commit : 26bd6d86d59d2c7227e4359d91852426c80134e2
  Date   : Fri Mar 31 00:10:52 2017
  Subject: [Reland #1] macOS: Fix a bug in logic to get all memory regions.

Bisect Details
  Configuration: mac_10_12_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2
  Metric       : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:private_dirty_size_max/memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:private_dirty_size_max
  Change       : 23.10% | 186323254.0 -> 229372690.667

Revision             Result                     N
chromium@459000      186323254 +- 8189229       6      good
chromium@460262      188418455 +- 6300459       6      good
chromium@460893      187648983 +- 5480486       6      good
chromium@460933      189711912 +- 7648076       6      good
chromium@460943      190189638 +- 14256611      6      good
chromium@460944      230234726 +- 3655575       6      bad       <--
chromium@460945      232935591 +- 2137666       6      bad
chromium@460946      230881098 +- 4397316       6      bad
chromium@460948      230044013 +- 4355838       6      bad
chromium@460953      229467721 +- 5842418       6      bad
chromium@460972      231586531 +- 2929762       6      bad
chromium@461051      229750966 +- 7420677       6      bad
chromium@461208      231375021 +- 6587926       6      bad
chromium@461523      229372691 +- 4804450       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 memory.long_running_idle_gmail_tbmv2

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8981719466956380272

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5860064860045312


| 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!
►

Sign in to add a comment