Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
2.7% regression in system_health.memory_mobile at 509317:509376 |
||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Oct 18 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965372509988487152
,
Oct 18 2017
=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author jgruber@chromium.org === Hi jgruber@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 : Jakob Gruber Commit : f7b09b3bdd96b4bd686b413c7a26e13f08ac4601 Date : Mon Oct 16 16:04:12 2017 Subject: Reland "[snapshot] Ship lazy TFJ builtins" Bisect Details Configuration: android_webview_arm64_aosp_perf_bisect Benchmark : system_health.memory_mobile Metric : memory:webview:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_avg/load_news/load_news_reddit Change : 2.74% | 14189536.0 -> 14578852.0 Revision Result N chromium@509316 14189536 +- 130436 6 good chromium@509324 14223061 +- 135774 6 good chromium@509325 14168981 +- 93012.3 6 good chromium@509325,v8@972d460f4f 14157077 +- 85612.5 6 good chromium@509325,v8@f7b09b3bdd 14531252 +- 102875 6 bad <-- chromium@509325,v8@efa038361d 14523801 +- 63065.1 6 bad chromium@509325,v8@6627b0aaf7 14540119 +- 84559.0 6 bad chromium@509326 14518428 +- 102431 6 bad chromium@509328 14518731 +- 82571.3 6 bad chromium@509331 14523355 +- 61980.2 6 bad chromium@509346 14553945 +- 80461.5 6 bad chromium@509376 14578852 +- 105627 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=android-webview --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=load.news.reddit system_health.memory_mobile More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965372509988487152 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 19 2017
,
Oct 19 2017
Issue 776169 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 19 2017
Issue 776170 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 19 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965323886958348704
,
Oct 19 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965323834609413920
,
Oct 19 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965323813939088880
,
Oct 19 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found with culprit Suspected Commit Author : Jakob Gruber Commit : f7b09b3bdd96b4bd686b413c7a26e13f08ac4601 Date : Mon Oct 16 16:04:12 2017 Subject: Reland "[snapshot] Ship lazy TFJ builtins" Bisect Details Configuration: winx64_high_dpi_perf_bisect Benchmark : system_health.memory_desktop Metric : memory:chrome:renderer_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:heap:effective_size_avg/load_games/load_games_lazors Change : 9.40% | 5578752.0 -> 6103040.0 Revision Result N chromium@509301 5578752 +- 0.0 6 good chromium@509320 5578752 +- 0.0 6 good chromium@509325 5578752 +- 0.0 6 good chromium@509325,v8@972d460f4f 5491371 +- 478607 6 good chromium@509325,v8@f7b09b3bdd 6103040 +- 0.0 6 bad <-- chromium@509325,v8@efa038361d 6103040 +- 0.0 6 bad chromium@509325,v8@6627b0aaf7 6103040 +- 0.0 6 bad chromium@509326 6103040 +- 0.0 6 bad chromium@509327 6103040 +- 0.0 6 bad chromium@509329 6103040 +- 0.0 6 bad chromium@509338 6015659 +- 478607 6 bad chromium@509375 6103040 +- 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.games.lazors 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/8965323886958348704 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 19 2017
Issue 776294 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 19 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found with culprit Suspected Commit Author : Jakob Gruber Commit : f7b09b3bdd96b4bd686b413c7a26e13f08ac4601 Date : Mon Oct 16 16:04:12 2017 Subject: Reland "[snapshot] Ship lazy TFJ builtins" Bisect Details Configuration: winx64intel_perf_bisect Benchmark : media.desktop Metric : memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_avg/video.html?src_crowd1080.webm Change : 10.34% | 5070848.0 -> 5595136.0 Revision Result N chromium@509259 5070848 +- 0.0 6 good chromium@509299 5070848 +- 0.0 6 good chromium@509319 5070848 +- 0.0 6 good chromium@509324 5158229 +- 478607 6 good chromium@509325 5070848 +- 0.0 6 good chromium@509325,v8@972d460f4f 5129102 +- 494303 9 good chromium@509325,v8@f7b09b3bdd 5595136 +- 0.0 6 bad <-- chromium@509325,v8@efa038361d 5595136 +- 0.0 6 bad chromium@509325,v8@6627b0aaf7 5595136 +- 0.0 6 bad chromium@509326 5595136 +- 0.0 9 bad chromium@509327 5682517 +- 478607 6 bad chromium@509329 5682517 +- 478607 6 bad chromium@509338 5595136 +- 0.0 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=video.html.src.crowd1080.webm media.desktop More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965323813939088880 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 19 2017
This seems to be an additional allocated page in code-space, see e.g.: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=4b396cecb6b34f6508ba8394c527c633af6fc17c3c0274fe25cb625c2b0a9d4b&start_rev=505526&end_rev=510020 https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=25e638f06c7e8cb439a684ea1757e4a58a7e996bbb9d354bfccba4be75b146bc&start_rev=505469&end_rev=509980 The reports so far are only from Windows machines. mlippautz@, I remember you mentioned this at some point. Is there a difference in how different OS's report these numbers? Are the additional 512K actually used or only requested from the OS and not necessarily mapped?
,
Oct 19 2017
Windows does not have on demand paging afaik. So any new page you allocate there will immediately result in a +512k delta for committed memory. This can happen if a CL pushes you across a certain threshold. I you can confirm that this can happen and is sort of expected, then this is fine.
,
Oct 20 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found with culprit Suspected Commit Author : Jakob Gruber Commit : f7b09b3bdd96b4bd686b413c7a26e13f08ac4601 Date : Mon Oct 16 16:04:12 2017 Subject: Reland "[snapshot] Ship lazy TFJ builtins" Bisect Details Configuration: android_webview_arm64_aosp_perf_bisect Benchmark : system_health.memory_mobile Metric : memory:webview:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_avg/load_news/load_news_reddit Change : 2.84% | 14174364.0 -> 14576646.6667 Revision Result N chromium@509316 14174364 +- 137479 6 good chromium@509324 14186612 +- 42697.4 6 good chromium@509325 14181871 +- 132617 6 good chromium@509325,v8@972d460f4f 14149037 +- 72157.6 6 good chromium@509325,v8@f7b09b3bdd 14543889 +- 100859 6 bad <-- chromium@509325,v8@efa038361d 14527969 +- 76186.0 6 bad chromium@509325,v8@6627b0aaf7 14560411 +- 58568.6 6 bad chromium@509326 14547548 +- 76010.5 6 bad chromium@509328 14537981 +- 70261.4 6 bad chromium@509331 14537008 +- 69083.3 6 bad chromium@509346 14575076 +- 160357 6 bad chromium@509376 14576647 +- 125932 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=android-webview --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=load.news.reddit system_health.memory_mobile More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965323834609413920 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 20 2017
Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965228267222581616
,
Oct 20 2017
=== BISECT JOB RESULTS === Perf regression found with culprit Suspected Commit Author : Jakob Gruber Commit : f7b09b3bdd96b4bd686b413c7a26e13f08ac4601 Date : Mon Oct 16 16:04:12 2017 Subject: Reland "[snapshot] Ship lazy TFJ builtins" Bisect Details Configuration: android_webview_arm64_aosp_perf_bisect Benchmark : memory.top_10_mobile Metric : memory:webview:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:v8:effective_size_avg/background/after_http_www_amazon_com_gp_aw_s_k_nexus Change : 2.49% | 10021480.0 -> 10270588.0 Revision Result N chromium@509316 10021480 +- 259544 9 good chromium@509324 9992361 +- 126530 6 good chromium@509325 9987477 +- 248329 6 good chromium@509325,v8@972d460f4f 10002264 +- 97437.4 6 good chromium@509325,v8@f7b09b3bdd 10241617 +- 127312 6 bad <-- chromium@509325,v8@efa038361d 10345048 +- 384298 6 bad chromium@509325,v8@6627b0aaf7 10280985 +- 259967 6 bad chromium@509326 10324107 +- 187594 6 bad chromium@509328 10242509 +- 160826 6 bad chromium@509331 10299856 +- 273851 6 bad chromium@509346 10218133 +- 183188 6 bad chromium@509376 10270588 +- 291511 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=android-webview --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests --story-filter=http.www.amazon.com.gp.aw.s.k.nexus memory.top_10_mobile More information on addressing performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Debug information about this bisect: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8965228267222581616 For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
,
Oct 20 2017
Issue 776853 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 21 2017
Issue 776854 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 21 2017
Issue 776855 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 21 2017
Issue 776860 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 23 2017
All of these regressions seem to behave similarly: Code space usage decreased by one page at point ID 502483 (probably due to csa write barriers). At point ID 509350, it increases by one page. This happens only on specific windows bots, all other machines show significant improvements for this range. See e.g. https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=3dffc3ac07df5a3003fc9996123acd63cc8e1ffe6eff14d1317c36b6e0bc37ae&start_rev=500809&end_rev=510719 So far, I don't have a local repro on my windows machine.
,
Oct 23 2017
Issue 777288 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 23 2017
Issue 777287 has been merged into this issue.
,
Oct 23 2017
,
Oct 25 2017
Issue 776851 has been merged into this issue.
,
Nov 9 2017
Still unable to repro this locally.
On win10, I ran system_health.memory_desktop {yandex,hackernews,lazers}. No change in memory consumption with {hackernews,lazers}.
yandex has a 1M regression in old space, this may be related to GC timing.
,
Nov 9 2017
Seems related to increased fragmentation. allocated_objects_size_avg decreases by ~300K while effective_size_avg goes up by 512K; so we're actually allocating fewer objects but these use more pages. Maybe related to GC heuristics or timing? See https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=ac813a819bf2ac802aee34e06a1f916e759342eb931cd6838e262c69847440c8&rev=509350 +cc Ulan and Hannes fyi.
,
Nov 9 2017
,
Nov 9 2017
Interesting that OLD_SPACE shows the same symptoms of increased fragmentation: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=51ede95d81dc196b5d71324ccad64d76de7fc0e71803a15a8885e8bf406c8dca&rev=509350
,
Nov 21 2017
These regressions are fixed by enabling lazy bytecode handlers (see the experiment at point id 515171). |
|||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Oct 18 2017