Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
12%-260.4% regression in thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases at 506784:506854 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Oct 6 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8966464622287335088
,
Oct 6 2017
=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author bokan@chromium.org === Hi bokan@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 : David Bokan Commit : 771bc4ee1d609083dd81daa0ee78229b49dfa270 Date : Thu Oct 05 18:39:46 2017 Subject: Use viewport coords in gpuBenchmarking gestures Bisect Details Configuration: android_webview_nexus6_aosp_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases Metric : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/text_constant_full_page_raster_20000_pixels_per_second Change : 251.21% | 0.939948200927 -> 3.30114815783 Revision Result N chromium@506783 0.939948 +- 0.337521 6 good chromium@506801 0.906562 +- 0.161839 6 good chromium@506803 0.922872 +- 0.335862 6 good chromium@506804 3.36261 +- 0.216506 6 bad <-- chromium@506806 3.38203 +- 0.352175 6 bad chromium@506810 3.38648 +- 0.302303 6 bad chromium@506819 3.33047 +- 0.213573 6 bad chromium@506854 3.30115 +- 0.215692 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 --story-filter=text.constant.full.page.raster.20000.pixels.per.second thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8966464622287335088 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 6 2017
It's definitely not a real regression as this CL only changed some simulation methods but it's still surprising. Will take a look.
,
Oct 6 2017
Issue 772469 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 6 2017
Issue 772472 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 10 2017
Issue 773033 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 10 2017
Issue 773046 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 11 2017
,
Oct 11 2017
Issue 773710 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 15 2017
The following revision refers to this bug: https://chromium.googlesource.com/catapult/+/b0d47f5f4d4b9717bfdd43ae6d40257235d0848f commit b0d47f5f4d4b9717bfdd43ae6d40257235d0848f Author: David Bokan <bokan@chromium.org> Date: Fri Oct 13 16:49:07 2017 Fix coordinate space issues in scroll.js In Chromium r506804, I changed all gpuBenchmarking methods to expect input arguments to be in screen/viewport coordinates. That is, they should track the "finger on the glass" rather than Elements on the page. Thus, they're invariant under pinch-zoom. However, I missed a few callsites in Catapult, scroll.js being one of them. Since gpuBenchmarking no longer applies the pageScaleFactor to the scroll distance, scroll.js must now do it itself. I've also cleaned how scroll distances are calculated in light of the "inert-visual-viewport" changes that shipped in M61. Namely, that the scrollTop value from body/window doesn't reflect the visualViepwort any more. Bug: chromium:772447 Change-Id: Ia4a55e1b5aa16a9c0c624d78f892e3299398b447 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/711159 Reviewed-by: Ned Nguyen <nednguyen@google.com> Commit-Queue: David Bokan <bokan@chromium.org> [modify] https://crrev.com/b0d47f5f4d4b9717bfdd43ae6d40257235d0848f/telemetry/telemetry/internal/actions/scroll.js
,
Oct 17 2017
The above CL fixes most of the changes in the original report. A handful seem to be unchanged so they warrant some further investigation: ChromiumPerf/chromium-rel-win7-dual/thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases / thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame / text_hover_05000_pixels_per_second ChromiumPerf/chromium-rel-win7-dual/thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases / thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame / text_hover_10000_pixels_per_second ChromiumPerf/chromium-rel-win7-dual/thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases / thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame / text_hover_15000_pixels_per_second ChromiumPerf/chromium-rel-win7-dual/thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases / thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame / text_hover_50000_pixels_per_second ChromiumPerf/chromium-rel-win7-x64-dual/thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases / thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame / text_hover_20000_pixels_per_second ChromiumPerf/android-nexus5/thread_times.key_mobile_sites_smooth / thread_IO_cpu_time_per_frame / http___cuteoverload.com
,
Oct 17 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965531971018189872
,
Oct 17 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965531866456174416
,
Oct 17 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: win_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases Metric : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/text_hover_50000_pixels_per_second Revision Result N chromium@506716 7.44167 +- 3.23776 21 good chromium@506990 7.05447 +- 2.72481 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=text.hover.50000.pixels.per.second thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965531866456174416 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 17 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found with culprit Suspected Commit Author : David Bokan Commit : 771bc4ee1d609083dd81daa0ee78229b49dfa270 Date : Thu Oct 05 18:39:46 2017 Subject: Use viewport coords in gpuBenchmarking gestures Bisect Details Configuration: android_nexus5_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.key_mobile_sites_smooth Metric : thread_IO_cpu_time_per_frame/http___cuteoverload.com Change : 5.12% | 3.06016511558 -> 3.21689371855 Revision Result N chromium@506756 3.06017 +- 0.0919344 6 good chromium@506796 3.08767 +- 0.124685 6 good chromium@506801 3.11166 +- 0.126923 6 good chromium@506803 3.1 +- 0.0634734 6 good chromium@506804 3.22195 +- 0.0713194 9 bad <-- chromium@506806 3.2203 +- 0.0375002 6 bad chromium@506816 3.23457 +- 0.0472179 6 bad chromium@506835 3.21689 +- 0.0857355 6 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 --story-filter=http...cuteoverload.com thread_times.key_mobile_sites_smooth More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965531971018189872 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 17 2017
Issue 774105 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 20 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965178440526191920
,
Oct 20 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965178378175548512
,
Oct 20 2017
Kicked off wider bisects for the thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame. Those are unlikely to be related since they're desktop - there should be no zoom involved... Looked into the thread_times issue, interestingly, it affects only Nexus 5X - Nexus 6 is unaffected. Will try to repro on a real device.
,
Oct 21 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: win_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases Metric : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/text_hover_20000_pixels_per_second Revision Result N chromium@506801 1.90001 +- 0.789815 21 good chromium@506896 1.8644 +- 0.882397 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=text.hover.20000.pixels.per.second thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965178378175548512 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 21 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found but unable to narrow commit range Build failures prevented the bisect from narrowing the range further. Bisect Details Configuration: win_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases Metric : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/text_hover_50000_pixels_per_second Change : 5.90% | 8.67630415802 -> 8.16457328435 Suspected Commit Range 2 commits in range https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+log/be4381d4036bfc0eee0cf74561711b98e08d8ba2..12234368f826f07d8a0cef2dd0f9b45f290e1464 Revision Result N chromium@506716 8.6763 +- 1.59258 14 good chromium@506785 8.42198 +- 1.4031 14 good chromium@506820 8.33737 +- 1.44791 14 good chromium@506827 8.15392 +- 1.52813 21 good chromium@506829 8.41134 +- 0.599027 6 good chromium@506830 --- --- build failure chromium@506831 7.37399 +- 0.712605 6 bad chromium@506833 7.91581 +- 2.13848 14 bad chromium@506838 7.64987 +- 1.84151 14 bad chromium@506853 7.90687 +- 1.2208 14 bad chromium@506990 8.16457 +- 1.43815 14 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=text.hover.50000.pixels.per.second thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965178440526191920 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 23 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8964942332746547936
,
Oct 23 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: win_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases Metric : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/text_hover_50000_pixels_per_second Revision Result N chromium@506365 7.93602 +- 2.40847 21 good chromium@506990 7.68554 +- 1.43743 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=text.hover.50000.pixels.per.second thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8964942332746547936 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 23 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8964912507621475328
,
Oct 23 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8964912486689508864
,
Oct 23 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: win_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases Metric : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/text_hover_15000_pixels_per_second Revision Result N chromium@506801 1.13748 +- 0.429995 21 good chromium@506896 1.2252 +- 0.479583 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=text.hover.15000.pixels.per.second thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8964912507621475328 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 23 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === NO Perf regression found Bisect Details Configuration: win_perf_bisect Benchmark : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases Metric : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/text_hover_05000_pixels_per_second Revision Result N chromium@506801 0.32881 +- 0.129895 21 good chromium@506896 0.325955 +- 0.110977 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=text.hover.05000.pixels.per.second thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8964912486689508864 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 24 2017
The following revision refers to this bug: https://chromium.googlesource.com/catapult/+/dbab215523c8d77a7b54fcf3776357b079c36899 commit dbab215523c8d77a7b54fcf3776357b079c36899 Author: David Bokan <bokan@chromium.org> Date: Tue Oct 24 14:24:10 2017 Fix telemetry gesture speeds In b0d47f5f4d4b9717bfdd43ae6d40257235d0848f I made it so telemetry JS scripts pass values to gpuBenchmarking in the coordinate space of the (visual) viewport. This missed the speed value which is assumed to be in CSS pixels/sec. Not performing this adjustment meant that the max scrollable distance calculation based on speed and maximum time was wrong. Bug: chromium:772447 Change-Id: Ifdf56781f90b8efabfec5f9e72dea8b125db7bfd Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/733980 Commit-Queue: David Bokan <bokan@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Ned Nguyen <nednguyen@google.com> [modify] https://crrev.com/dbab215523c8d77a7b54fcf3776357b079c36899/telemetry/telemetry/internal/actions/scroll.js [modify] https://crrev.com/dbab215523c8d77a7b54fcf3776357b079c36899/telemetry/telemetry/internal/actions/drag.js [modify] https://crrev.com/dbab215523c8d77a7b54fcf3776357b079c36899/telemetry/telemetry/internal/actions/pinch.js [modify] https://crrev.com/dbab215523c8d77a7b54fcf3776357b079c36899/telemetry/telemetry/internal/actions/swipe.js
,
Oct 27 2017
I've fixed an issue I found in telemetry and split off all the other dup'd regressions that were unrelated so I'm marking this as fixed. |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Oct 6 2017