New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 726505 link

Starred by 6 users

Issue metadata

Status: WontFix
Owner: ----
Closed: Nov 27
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Windows , Mac
Pri: 3
Type: Bug

Blocking:
issue 737101



Sign in to add a comment

Add idle wakeups to chrome://tracing

Project Member Reported by shrike@chromium.org, May 25 2017

Issue description

Pipe idle wakeup metric from within Chrome (collected by the task manager backend) to chrome://tracing so that it fits into the TBMv2 perf tests. Do this on all the platforms that collect this metric.
 
Cc: tdres...@chromium.org
Components: Speed>Metrics
Cc: dproy@chromium.org
Cc: charliea@chromium.org
Cc: nedngu...@google.com
Blocking: 737101

Comment 6 by shrike@chromium.org, Jun 27 2017

My plan is to get idle wakeups from GetIdleWakeupsPerSecond() in process_metrics.cc.

Comment 7 by shrike@chromium.org, Jun 27 2017

Also related is Issue 649641.

Cc: altimin@chromium.org

Comment 9 by lgrey@chromium.org, Sep 25 2017

Cc: lgrey@chromium.org
Note that on Windows ProcessMetrics::GetIdleWakeupsPerSecond() is not (yet) implemented. 

[18356:14996:1023/133635.411:ERROR:process_metrics.cc(105)] NOT IMPLEMENTED
(Call Stack)
>	base.dll!base::ProcessMetrics::GetIdleWakeupsPerSecond() Line 105	C++	Symbols loaded.
 	chrome.dll!performance_monitor::ProcessMetricsHistory::SampleMetrics() Line 82	C++	Symbols loaded.
 	chrome.dll!performance_monitor::PerformanceMonitor::UpdateMetricsOnIOThread(int current_update_sequence) Line 200	C++	Symbols loaded.

Comment 11 by lgrey@chromium.org, Oct 23 2017

Will send a CL to disable for Windows later today, thanks for bringing it up!
 Issue 778526  has been merged into this issue.
Owner: ----
Status: Available (was: Assigned)
 Issue 794884  has been merged into this issue.
Labels: -Pri-2 Pri-3
Labels: -M-61
Bug creator has unassigned themselves. Does this still need to get done? If there are no replies in some time, the next triage from Speed Metrics should mark this as WontFix.
Status: WontFix (was: Available)
I believe perfetto plans to do this?

Marking WontFix, as I don't think we'll be able to justify the effort anytime soon otherwise.
Yeah makes sense to punt to perfetto, as we're not looking to write a metric that uses this signal in the immediate future. 

Sign in to add a comment