Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
202.7% regression in loading.desktop at 494361:494538 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Aug 28 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8970000411624063584
,
Aug 28 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: mac_10_12_mini_8gb_perf_bisect Benchmark : loading.desktop Metric : cpuTimeToFirstMeaningfulPaint_avg/pcv1-cold/ja.wikipedia Revision Result N chromium@494360 2619.34 +- 333.862 21 good chromium@494538 2668.0 +- 379.991 19 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=ja.wikipedia loading.desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8970000411624063584 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 9 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8966189918177581088
,
Oct 9 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8966189902716904080
,
Oct 9 2017
Kicked off a few more bisects, some on wider range. Looks like there may be multiple regressions.
,
Oct 9 2017
=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author kerrnel@chromium.org === Hi kerrnel@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 : Greg Kerr Commit : 9705b7aaabf4c81d4e9cb13174338df9bde61cc4 Date : Tue Aug 15 19:42:42 2017 Subject: Enable Finch Trial Test for MacV2Sandbox. Bisect Details Configuration: mac_10_11_perf_bisect Benchmark : loading.desktop Metric : cpuTimeToFirstMeaningfulPaint_avg/pcv1-warm/FDA Change : 14.41% | 281.420833333 -> 321.974833333 Revision Result N chromium@494399 281.421 +- 2.82812 6 good chromium@494465 282.45 +- 7.14277 6 good chromium@494498 282.956 +- 4.36996 6 good chromium@494500 282.822 +- 8.82162 6 good chromium@494501 285.129 +- 6.97171 6 good chromium@494502 320.493 +- 7.44149 6 bad <-- chromium@494506 319.543 +- 4.47796 6 bad chromium@494514 320.822 +- 8.16364 6 bad chromium@494530 317.518 +- 9.27686 6 bad chromium@494660 321.975 +- 6.21749 6 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=FDA loading.desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8966189902716904080 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 9 2017
9705b7aaabf4c81d4e9cb13174338df9bde61cc4 was reverted, so if this regression still exists, something else is the culprit.
,
Oct 9 2017
Do you know so many of the perf bisect jobs pin the cause on CLs that were already reverted?
,
Oct 10 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found with culprit Suspected Commit Author : Greg Kerr Commit : 9705b7aaabf4c81d4e9cb13174338df9bde61cc4 Date : Tue Aug 15 19:42:42 2017 Subject: Enable Finch Trial Test for MacV2Sandbox. Bisect Details Configuration: mac_10_11_perf_bisect Benchmark : loading.desktop Metric : timeToFirstMeaningfulPaint_avg/pcv1-cold/AirBnB Change : 5.75% | 1449.65222222 -> 1532.99811111 Revision Result N chromium@494122 1449.65 +- 118.767 9 good chromium@494456 1464.08 +- 53.076 9 good chromium@494498 1464.08 +- 107.009 14 good chromium@494501 1453.43 +- 61.039 9 good chromium@494502 1542.89 +- 92.0982 6 bad <-- chromium@494503 1534.8 +- 183.863 14 bad chromium@494504 1530.63 +- 76.236 9 bad chromium@494509 1544.8 +- 32.788 6 bad chromium@494519 1502.15 +- 150.012 14 bad chromium@494540 1526.1 +- 97.0282 9 bad chromium@494623 1531.0 +- 54.7498 6 bad chromium@494790 1548.57 +- 44.8259 6 bad chromium@495457 1533.0 +- 78.664 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=AirBnB loading.desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8966189918177581088 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 10 2017
Let me try one more with a different range.
,
Oct 10 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8966158133356456736
,
Oct 10 2017
,
Oct 10 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: mac_10_11_perf_bisect Benchmark : loading.desktop Metric : timeToFirstMeaningfulPaint_avg/pcv1-cold/AirBnB Revision Result N chromium@494277 1433.44 +- 134.24 21 good chromium@494399 1449.59 +- 184.409 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=AirBnB loading.desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8966158133356456736 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 10 2017
kerrnel: sorry for all the noise. Yes, perf bisects do assign a culprit even if the CL has already been reverted. There are a lot of ups and downs in these graphs so it wasn't possible to tell whether the regression was related to Mac V2 sandbox or something else. I split off some unrelated alerts into bug 773263 and closing this one as fixed by the revert. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Aug 28 2017