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

Issue 740927 link

Starred by 2 users

Issue metadata

Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 738718
Owner: ----
Closed: Jul 2017
Cc:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

84.8% regression in v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop at 483506:483604

Project Member Reported by petermarshall@chromium.org, Jul 11 2017

Issue description

See the link to graphs below.
 
Project Member

Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Jul 11 2017

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=740927

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=d91a175195e416e079ea4c4fa00a9202e8ac0a1deb82dba2733fd698c99130e5


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

chromium-rel-win7-gpu-nvidia
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Jul 11 2017


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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop
  Metric       : v8-gc-scavenger_avg/browse_social/browse_social_twitter

Revision             Result                   N
chromium@483505      1.17044 +- 0.982865      21      good
chromium@483604      1.07201 +- 1.1051        21      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.twitter 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/8974363325452028352


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
Project Member

Comment 5 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Jul 12 2017


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

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


Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop
  Metric       : v8-gc-scavenger_avg/browse_social/browse_social_twitter


To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.twitter 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/8974289552964614416


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
Project Member

Comment 7 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Jul 13 2017


=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
Perf regression found but unable to narrow commit range

Build failures prevented the bisect from narrowing the range further.


Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64nvidia_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop
  Metric       : v8-gc-scavenger_avg/browse_social/browse_social_twitter
  Change       : 53.42% | 1.11803275249 -> 1.71533090231

Suspected Commit Range
  2 commits in range
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8.git/+log/937b5011b88e995658c5e08e48d9ab928cfe5eee..f341bb0f623821e56349735e47e1a9094f65d9a3


Revision                           Result                   N
chromium@482978                    1.11803 +- 0.473848      6        good
chromium@483433                    1.0872 +- 0.470196       6        good
chromium@483661                    1.20483 +- 0.371959      6        good
chromium@483718                    1.19589 +- 0.34981       9        good
chromium@483726                    1.13241 +- 0.896669      14       good
chromium@483728                    1.12815 +- 0.549579      9        good
chromium@483729                    1.24237 +- 0.467684      14       good
chromium@483729,v8@6407a3c052      1.19406 +- 0.901118      14       good
chromium@483729,v8@27b0d6a9fc      1.17727 +- 0.733351      9        good
chromium@483729,v8@937b5011b8      1.27441 +- 0.36806       9        good
chromium@483729,v8@ca93156294      ---                      ---      build failure
chromium@483729,v8@f341bb0f62      1.55603 +- 0.46057       9        bad
chromium@483730                    1.49771 +- 0.669361      14       bad
chromium@483733                    1.43365 +- 0.331778      9        bad
chromium@483747                    1.53216 +- 0.45669       6        bad
chromium@483775                    1.62235 +- 0.451744      9        bad
chromium@483888                    1.71533 +- 0.278247      6        bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.twitter 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/8974268108486332512


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
Mergedinto: 738718
Status: Duplicate (was: Untriaged)
Bisect has two commits, looks like it belongs to Ulan's

Sign in to add a comment