Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
4.1% regression in thread_times.key_silk_cases at 482862:482921 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Aug 10 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971644024568682336
,
Aug 11 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: 41765c0da435e28b914a271fc64dfe2c761fdb5d bad_revision : 7df4d3a9181f7138fb7ea00c5a8bf51db6e8250a If failures persist contact the team (see below) and report the error. Bisect Details Configuration: android_nexus5_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.key_silk_cases Metric : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame Revision Result N chromium@482861 1.74428 +- 0.201768 14 good chromium@482891 1.76066 +- 0.301863 21 good chromium@482906 1.77605 +- 0.326568 14 bad chromium@482921 1.81865 +- 0.198047 13 bad 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 thread_times.key_silk_cases More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8971644024568682336 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Sep 18 2017
This didn't repro, graph is noisy. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Aug 10 2017