New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 779812 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 778587
Owner:
Closed: Oct 2017
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

6.2%-621.8% regression in smoothness.gpu_rasterization.top_25_smooth at 511313:511540

Project Member Reported by briander...@chromium.org, Oct 30 2017

Issue description

See the link to graphs below.
 
Project Member

Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 30 2017

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=779812

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=27740e1c3d6ad7bf721e03506711989a7d29561a72dca33dc3cf2b2fe425a865


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

android-nexus5
android-nexus5X
android-nexus6
android-one
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 31 2017

Cc: npm@chromium.org
Owner: npm@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)

=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author npm@chromium.org ===

Hi npm@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 : Nicolas Pena
  Commit : dc09ff8f270573e210f6d388f2de134cacc3ed17
  Date   : Wed Oct 25 14:29:29 2017
  Subject: Reland: Add UMA histograms for EQT by task queue type

Bisect Details
  Configuration: android_nexus5X_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases
  Metric       : thread_raster_cpu_time_per_frame/text_constant_full_page_raster_60000_pixels_per_second
  Change       : 4.97% | 4.28391015927 -> 4.07084186576

Revision             Result                   N
chromium@511424      4.28391 +- 0.371198      9       good
chromium@511439      4.20372 +- 0.394771      14      good
chromium@511446      4.17736 +- 0.189254      14      good
chromium@511447      4.08034 +- 0.169614      6       bad       <--
chromium@511451      4.10357 +- 0.354413      14      bad
chromium@511453      4.06433 +- 0.416718      14      bad
chromium@511482      4.06864 +- 0.225308      9       bad
chromium@511540      4.07084 +- 0.258404      9       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=text.constant.full.page.raster.60000.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/8964269731991985632


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection

Comment 4 by npm@chromium.org, Oct 31 2017

Components: Blink>PerformanceAPIs
I wonder if this is due to increased UMA reporting or something else... We may need to think of another way to aggregate split EQT.
Kicking off another bisect just to be sure these results are correct.

This seems pretty surprising to me. Might be worth making a microbenchmark and profiling this code if it is legitimately the issue.
Project Member

Comment 7 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 31 2017

Mergedinto: 778587
Status: Duplicate (was: Assigned)

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

Suspected Commit
  Author : David Bokan
  Commit : dbab215523c8d77a7b54fcf3776357b079c36899
  Date   : Tue Oct 24 14:24:10 2017
  Subject: Fix telemetry gesture speeds

Bisect Details
  Configuration: android_nexus5_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : thread_times.tough_scrolling_cases
  Metric       : thread_total_all_cpu_time_per_frame/text_constant_full_page_raster_15000_pixels_per_second
  Change       : 7.49% | 26.3219950861 -> 28.2940512319

Revision                                 Result                   N
chromium@511393                          26.322 +- 1.69096        6      good
chromium@511396                          26.4831 +- 2.48988       6      good
chromium@511397                          26.3653 +- 1.57267       6      good
chromium@511397,catapult@f9691b256a      26.4048 +- 1.93158       6      good
chromium@511397,catapult@dbab215523      28.4617 +- 0.803745      6      bad       <--
chromium@511397,catapult@2f4cf37a9f      28.6626 +- 1.18022       6      bad
chromium@511398                          28.5473 +- 0.785091      6      bad
chromium@511402                          28.2943 +- 0.417701      6      bad
chromium@511410                          28.5918 +- 0.694347      6      bad
chromium@511426                          28.2941 +- 0.676518      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=text.constant.full.page.raster.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/8964210030715217584


For feedback, file a bug with component Speed>Bisection
Looks like it wasn't the EQT patch!

Sign in to add a comment