All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=762496

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=07aa9cf4f8ed28314d2ac2491c79efc6eebe87e537e1e7fc2dc6532b4ce4dcb4


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

chromium-rel-win7-gpu-ati

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8969198488786653456

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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64ati_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : system_health.memory_desktop
  Metric       : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:heap:effective_size_avg/load_social/load_social_vk

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@499413      9484971 +- 2265183      21      good
chromium@499419      9410072 +- 2527378      21      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=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=load.social.vk system_health.memory_desktop

More information on addressing performance regressions:
  http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions

Debug information about this bisect:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8969198488786653456


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8969174629752163232

=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
Perf regression found with culprit

Suspected Commit
  Author : Jeremy Roman
  Commit : 1739c42dd9346a595a82600a558852b37535ba39
  Date   : Sun Sep 03 03:07:35 2017
  Subject: [Bindings] Generate explicit constructor stubs.

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64ati_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : system_health.memory_desktop
  Metric       : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:heap:effective_size_avg/load_social/load_social_vk
  Change       : 5.97% | 8785920.0 -> 9310208.0

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@499370      8785920 +- 0.0          14      good
chromium@499402      8785920 +- 0.0          21      good
chromium@499410      8785920 +- 0.0          21      good
chromium@499411      9484971 +- 1210791      6       bad       <--
chromium@499412      9310208 +- 1284238      6       bad
chromium@499414      9222827 +- 1152639      6       bad
chromium@499418      9347657 +- 2281019      14      bad
chromium@499434      9347657 +- 2281019      14      bad
chromium@499498      9272759 +- 1885147      14      bad
chromium@499625      9310208 +- 0.0          9       bad
chromium@499879      9310208 +- 0.0          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=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=load.social.vk system_health.memory_desktop

More information on addressing performance regressions:
  http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions

Debug information about this bisect:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8969174629752163232


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection