Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
28.2%-338.4% regression in v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop at 480778:481280 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Jun 28 2017
,
Jun 28 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: linux_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : v8-gc-phantom-handle-callback_max/browse_media/browse_media_tumblr Revision Result N chromium@480777 0.051 +- 0.0297658 21 good chromium@481280 0.0627143 +- 0.103278 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 --story-filter=browse.media.tumblr v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Debug Info https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8975553019310119648 Is this bisect wrong? https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6056135645200384 | 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!
,
Jun 28 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8975524463573883040
,
Jun 29 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: linux_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : v8-gc-phantom-handle-callback_max/browse_media/browse_media_tumblr Revision Result N chromium@480777 0.0719524 +- 0.0556862 21 good chromium@481280 0.0761905 +- 0.0537702 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 --story-filter=browse.media.tumblr v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Debug Info https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8975524463573883040 Is this bisect wrong? https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6056135645200384 | 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!
,
Jun 29 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8975450980013918896
,
Jun 30 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: a76034b7173c0ac0ef978b694a8d41f4fd663780 bad_revision : af20afb7dfb538bb139dfba37219c6a8e9a94124 If failures persist contact the team (see below) and report the error. Bisect Details Configuration: linux_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : v8-gc-total_sum/browse_media/browse_media_tumblr Revision Result N chromium@480777 162.659 +- 29.5633 14 good chromium@480793 162.902 +- 49.1987 14 good chromium@480799 159.539 +- 26.4833 14 good chromium@480800 --- --- build failure --- --- --- too many build failures to list chromium@480811 --- --- build failure chromium@480812 148.979 +- 50.8388 21 bad chromium@480843 152.108 +- 33.0353 14 bad chromium@480909 150.455 +- 25.1134 14 bad chromium@481040 149.643 +- 38.1178 14 bad chromium@481280 146.35 +- 18.1271 9 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 --story-filter=browse.media.tumblr v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8975450980013918896 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Jun 30 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8975358309994785152
,
Jul 1 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Bisect was unable to run to completion Please try rerunning the bisect. If failures persist contact the team (see below) and report the error. Bisect Details Configuration: linux_perf_bisect Benchmark : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop Metric : v8-gc-total_sum/browse_media/browse_media_tumblr Revision Result N chromium@480777 159.443 +- 58.1608 21 good chromium@480793 164.384 +- 45.2267 14 good chromium@480794 160.957 +- 53.5848 21 good chromium@480794,v8@1539f12568 159.002 +- 46.9098 21 good chromium@480794,v8@6f0ca10e3f --- --- build failure chromium@480795 150.001 +- 29.2912 14 bad chromium@480797 151.552 +- 41.8106 14 bad chromium@480802 152.164 +- 43.5004 21 bad chromium@480811 148.312 +- 48.7067 21 bad chromium@480843 143.537 +- 27.4119 14 bad chromium@480909 146.681 +- 26.3745 14 bad chromium@481040 141.841 +- 11.6959 9 bad chromium@481280 146.861 +- 21.984 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 --story-filter=browse.media.tumblr v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8975358309994785152 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Jul 11 2017
,
Jul 24 2017
Bisect bot cannot reproduce the regression. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Jun 28 2017