New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 768288 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 768063
Owner: ----
Closed: Sep 2017
Cc:
mlippautz@chromium.org
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

5.4%-231.1% regression in v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop at 502499:503862

Project Member Reported by mlippautz@chromium.org, Sep 25 2017 
See the link to graphs below.
Project Member

Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Sep 25 2017 

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=768288

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=2d5dcfe28412d0382f57bb7e3a26cb7d6a1e9b780fca33c48f02ecbb2beae508


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

chromium-rel-mac-retina
chromium-rel-mac11
chromium-rel-mac11-air
chromium-rel-mac11-pro
chromium-rel-mac12
chromium-rel-mac12-mini-8gb
chromium-rel-win10
chromium-rel-win7-dual
chromium-rel-win7-gpu-ati
chromium-rel-win7-gpu-intel
chromium-rel-win7-gpu-nvidia
chromium-rel-win7-x64-dual
chromium-rel-win8-dual
linux-release
win-high-dpi
Project Member

Comment 5 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Sep 29 2017

Mergedinto: 768063
Status: Duplicate (was: Untriaged)

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

Suspected Commit
  Author : Ulan Degenbaev
  Commit : a76d0a771e430dbc8716624febc549aede738d96
  Date   : Thu Sep 21 12:35:10 2017
  Subject: Reland "[heap] Enable concurrent marking for x86 and x64."

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64_10_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop
  Metric       : v8-gc-total_avg/browse_media/browse_media_pinterest
  Change       : 32.06% | 0.605404030323 -> 0.799495976908

Revision                           Result                     N
chromium@503447                    0.605404 +- 0.0572444      6      good
chromium@503489                    0.590125 +- 0.104708       6      good
chromium@503491                    0.614181 +- 0.0792025      6      good
chromium@503491,v8@2857dab5cb      0.609092 +- 0.100307       5      good
chromium@503491,v8@a76d0a771e      0.871761 +- 0.159943       6      bad       <--
chromium@503492                    0.896712 +- 0.199897       6      bad
chromium@503495                    0.835002 +- 0.130725       6      bad
chromium@503500                    0.823684 +- 0.181396       6      bad
chromium@503510                    0.778447 +- 0.113274       6      bad
chromium@503531                    0.799496 +- 0.104276       6      bad

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=browse.media.pinterest v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop

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

Debug information about this bisect:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8967135953058841216


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
Project Member

Comment 6 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Sep 29 2017 


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

Suspected Commit
  Author : Ulan Degenbaev
  Commit : a76d0a771e430dbc8716624febc549aede738d96
  Date   : Thu Sep 21 12:35:10 2017
  Subject: Reland "[heap] Enable concurrent marking for x86 and x64."

Bisect Details
  Configuration: win_8_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop
  Metric       : v8-gc-total_avg/browse_media/browse_media_imgur
  Change       : 180.32% | 1.35885746912 -> 3.80920166666

Revision                           Result                   N
chromium@503454                    1.35886 +- 0.507766      6      good
chromium@503477                    1.35645 +- 0.429222      6      good
chromium@503489                    1.47499 +- 0.507032      6      good
chromium@503491                    1.38389 +- 0.537961      6      good
chromium@503491,v8@2857dab5cb      1.4493 +- 0.41419        6      good
chromium@503491,v8@a76d0a771e      3.66213 +- 1.83787       6      bad       <--
chromium@503492                    3.41626 +- 1.22263       6      bad
chromium@503495                    3.31549 +- 0.730199      6      bad
chromium@503500                    3.34226 +- 0.691538      6      bad
chromium@503545                    3.8092 +- 2.11565        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=browse.media.imgur v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop

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

Debug information about this bisect:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8967135966093785136


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
Project Member

Comment 7 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Sep 29 2017 


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

Bisect Details
  Configuration: win_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop
  Metric       : v8-gc-total_avg/browse_tech/browse_tech_discourse_infinite_scroll

Revision             Result                    N
chromium@503455      0.936361 +- 0.390605      21      good
chromium@503553      0.996439 +- 0.65402       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=browse.tech.discourse.infinite.scroll v8.runtimestats.browsing_desktop

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

Debug information about this bisect:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8967135937543025120


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
►

Sign in to add a comment