Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
1%-48.1% regression in system_health.memory_mobile at 486074:487676 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionThis regression may have been introduced before this benchmark run, so we may have to adjust the revision range to bisect if this first bisect doesn't work.
,
Jul 21 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8973437917996973264
,
Jul 21 2017
=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author hubbe@chromium.org === Hi hubbe@chromium.org, the bisect results pointed to your CL, please take a look at the results. === BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found with culprit Suspected Commit Author : hubbe Commit : e2cc88c09afab5f066c83032548c1180d99c5ae7 Date : Fri Jul 14 23:11:01 2017 Subject: media: Allow suspend on HTTP 200 videos Bisect Details Configuration: android_webview_nexus6_aosp_perf_bisect Benchmark : system_health.memory_mobile Metric : memory:webview:all_processes:reported_by_os:system_memory:java_heap:proportional_resident_size_avg/browse_media/browse_media_imgur Change : 10.53% | 5321159.11111 -> 5881287.11111 Revision Result N chromium@486073 5321159 +- 11285356 9 good chromium@486875 4340053 +- 134816 6 good chromium@486901 4746240 +- 277245 6 good chromium@486914 4916907 +- 126568 6 good chromium@486917 5161301 +- 465556 6 good chromium@486918 5437099 +- 253583 6 good chromium@486919 6336853 +- 325492 6 bad <-- chromium@486920 6241280 +- 416414 6 bad chromium@486926 5634389 +- 146505 6 bad chromium@486976 5437099 +- 514873 6 bad chromium@487076 5394091 +- 224472 6 bad chromium@487276 5364053 +- 506835 6 bad chromium@487676 5881287 +- 730795 9 bad Please refer to the following doc on diagnosing memory regressions: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/memory-infra/memory_benchmarks.md To Run This Test src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-webview --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.media.imgur system_health.memory_mobile More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8973437917996973264 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Jul 24 2017
,
Jul 25 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8973093290627239616
,
Jul 25 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8973092699738494832
,
Jul 25 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8973092680068961744
,
Jul 25 2017
There are some ~0.9 to 2.0mb (5% - 7%) increases in renderer malloc for various browse stories in the same range (see [1]). Think they might have the same cause, bisecting to be sure. [1]: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=579369d1114b064b3d217322157df09efb9108fb2ec4ccc8b08445fa115faf4a&start_rev=473906&end_rev=489266&rev=488787
,
Jul 26 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: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Benchmark : system_health.memory_mobile Metric : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:malloc:effective_size_avg/browse_social/browse_social_instagram Change : 3.97% | 14911966.2222 -> 15503245.3333 Suspected Commit Range 12 commits in range https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+log/4afd513b88234976f17b06eee24892ce9d149e7e..e5ef88bfc930b8066ae7c8a5ec5cf35577bbcd2b Revision Result N chromium@486073 14911966 +- 1079311 9 good chromium@486474 14625156 +- 769698 6 good chromium@486675 14952192 +- 360710 6 good chromium@486725 14569028 +- 531590 6 good chromium@486738 14744473 +- 1064136 9 good chromium@486744 14742782 +- 867046 9 good chromium@486745 14648569 +- 958846 6 good chromium@486745,v8@44cce0fcc0 --- --- build failure --- --- --- too many build failures to list chromium@486745,v8@a97abb909b --- --- build failure chromium@486746 15989705 +- 761471 6 bad chromium@486747 15772589 +- 1189765 6 bad chromium@486750 15955316 +- 1168916 6 bad chromium@486775 15847440 +- 490174 6 bad chromium@486875 15772443 +- 951563 6 bad chromium@487676 15503245 +- 1037220 9 bad Please refer to the following doc on diagnosing memory regressions: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/memory-infra/memory_benchmarks.md To Run This Test src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.instagram system_health.memory_mobile More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8973093290627239616 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Jul 26 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: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Benchmark : system_health.memory_mobile Metric : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:malloc:effective_size_avg/browse_media/browse_media_flickr_infinite_scroll Change : 7.80% | 19757832.0 -> 21299212.0 Suspected Commit Range 12 commits in range https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+log/4afd513b88234976f17b06eee24892ce9d149e7e..e5ef88bfc930b8066ae7c8a5ec5cf35577bbcd2b Revision Result N chromium@486073 19757832 +- 856514 6 good chromium@486474 19861007 +- 931310 6 good chromium@486675 20019827 +- 520621 6 good chromium@486725 20147527 +- 403418 6 good chromium@486738 19996017 +- 423346 6 good chromium@486744 20219407 +- 577876 6 good chromium@486745 19979601 +- 473489 6 good chromium@486745,v8@44cce0fcc0 --- --- build failure --- --- --- too many build failures to list chromium@486745,v8@a97abb909b --- --- build failure chromium@486746 21667337 +- 817240 6 bad chromium@486747 21392265 +- 827042 6 bad chromium@486750 21476360 +- 375980 6 bad chromium@486775 21292004 +- 893693 6 bad chromium@486875 21780344 +- 519033 6 bad chromium@487676 21299212 +- 1079221 6 bad Please refer to the following doc on diagnosing memory regressions: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/memory-infra/memory_benchmarks.md To Run This Test src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.media.flickr.infinite.scroll system_health.memory_mobile More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8973092699738494832 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Jul 26 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: android_nexus6_perf_bisect Benchmark : system_health.memory_mobile Metric : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:malloc:effective_size_avg/browse_social/browse_social_pinterest_infinite_scroll Change : 4.09% | 26685509.3333 -> 27776692.0 Suspected Commit Range 12 commits in range https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+log/4afd513b88234976f17b06eee24892ce9d149e7e..e5ef88bfc930b8066ae7c8a5ec5cf35577bbcd2b Revision Result N chromium@486073 26685509 +- 591332 6 good chromium@486474 26780196 +- 481435 6 good chromium@486675 26729804 +- 879756 6 good chromium@486725 26827513 +- 728764 6 good chromium@486738 26648836 +- 566383 6 good chromium@486744 26796772 +- 151686 6 good chromium@486745 26321207 +- 831888 6 good chromium@486745,v8@44cce0fcc0 --- --- build failure --- --- --- too many build failures to list chromium@486745,v8@a97abb909b --- --- build failure chromium@486746 28006827 +- 1263534 6 bad chromium@486747 28005187 +- 442922 6 bad chromium@486750 27719465 +- 717675 6 bad chromium@486775 27816825 +- 745097 6 bad chromium@486875 27721880 +- 705059 6 bad chromium@487676 27776692 +- 408198 6 bad Please refer to the following doc on diagnosing memory regressions: https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/master/docs/memory-infra/memory_benchmarks.md To Run This Test src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=android-chromium --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=browse.social.pinterest.infinite.scroll system_health.memory_mobile More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8973092680068961744 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Aug 11 2017
I suspect this is a symptom of caching the whole video when the video is small, which is intended.
,
Aug 17 2017
What's the limit of the intended regression?
,
Aug 17 2017
Only videos 25Mb or smaller are fully cached. The regression should be smaller than that, since we would previously allow the cache to grow up to 25Mb, but didn't care if some parts got thrown out. After my change we explicitly keep all parts of the video if we think it's small enough. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Jul 21 2017