Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
1.4%-3.5% regression in webrtc_perf_tests at 18580:18581 |
||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionThe chromium roll contains a clang update. sprang@: Is PSNR typically affected by compiler optimizations? Are these changes acceptable or should we dig further? kjellander@: Should we file feedback to the clang team when we get regressions?
,
Jun 20 2017
I don't follow what Chromium roll we're talking about here. I can only see 3 regular WebRTC commits in the blame list: https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/webrtc/+log/0ef8fb91b4930783f0f32cbd3a68e5f98b6ebdd4..8fa21c49eff52b1848ff16483cc3a07af6acc7ca I know that Android switched from GCC -> Clang in #18537 (https://codereview.webrtc.org/2930243004/) which caused performance changes, but that's far earlier than this. If we're sure a Clang roll is a perf regression we should probably follow up, yes. First thing would be to look for similar bugs in Chromium though.
,
Jun 20 2017
This is the blame list I get. Did I misunderstand something? https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/webrtc/+log/7dce727c88e508f62b88aa68715fd5d6967bfbf4..b7d601552971992d40e84a70f936ea4e38044d91
,
Jun 20 2017
Sorry, my bad (clicked the wrong alert in the graph). You're right, it's a regular Clang roll, and it can affect Android since it's after they switched to use Clang... so if you think the regression is enough to follow up on - file a clang bug or dig into similar Chromium bugs in that range. |
|||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by terelius@chromium.org
, Jun 16 2017