Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
33.2% improvement in blink_perf.bindings at 501351:501407 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSuspiciously large improvement, could this be a bug?
,
Sep 19 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8968029821064164000
,
Sep 21 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Bisect was unable to run to completion Error: TIMEOUT The bisect was able to narrow the range, you can try running with: good_revision: 80806e4e369dac6375d5e36054e063832dc613e8 bad_revision : fc6cfd50c4eec740276d7245bb430f73faa77452 If failures persist contact the team (see below) and report the error. Bisect Details Configuration: android_webview_arm64_aosp_perf_bisect Benchmark : blink_perf.bindings Metric : document-implementation/document-implementation Change : 28.66% | 130.180423529 -> 167.484098255 Revision Result N chromium@501350 130.18 +- 1.58198 6 good chromium@501379 163.263 +- 32.0966 6 bad chromium@501407 167.484 +- 24.3565 6 bad 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 blink_perf.bindings More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8968029821064164000 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Dec 12 2017
Bisect unable to find culprit, this regression exists in stable. Ignoring. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Sep 19 2017