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

Issue 780368 link

Starred by 3 users

Issue metadata

Status: Verified
Owner:
Closed: Mar 2018
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Chrome
Pri: 2
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

820.8% regression in video_VDAPerf.h264/crowd2160_h264.frame_drop_rate on cros-peppy at 10077.0.0

Project Member Reported by johnylin@chromium.org, Nov 1 2017

Issue description

Performance dashboard identified a 820.8% regression in video_VDAPerf.h264/crowd2160_h264.frame_drop_rate on cros-peppy at revision range 32520001007600001:32530001007700000 (regression from 10077.0.0)

Graph: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?masters=ChromeOSVideo&bots=cros-peppy&tests=video_VDAPerf.h264%2Fcrowd2160_h264.frame_drop_rate&checked=crowd2160_h264.frame_drop_rate%2Ccrowd2160_h264.frame_drop_rate_ref%2Cref&rev=32530001007700000
 

Comment 1 by hiroh@chromium.org, Nov 1 2017

Cc: -hiroh@chromium.org posciak@chromium.org
Owner: hiroh@chromium.org
This regression happens on falco and wolf, whose processors are haswell as well as peppy.
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=fd8179fd433e77d48e8715430e0d4cf9354d714a3da48fd984814f8c96cec2f5

I am concerned about the zig-zag change. I am going to wait and see in a day, and address tomorrow.

Comment 2 by hiroh@chromium.org, Nov 2 2017

The same regression is caused on link and panther. link is IvyBridge though.
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?sid=1301706a92cde3f6844645dd7370d7505a097cee65858a20d6797babcd4f2c8a&rev=32530001007700000

I am investigating this regression using link.
ChromeOS range: 10076.0.0-10077.0.0
Chrome range: 64.0.3252.0-64.0.3253.0

Comment 3 by hiroh@chromium.org, Nov 2 2017

Cc: hiroh@chromium.org tfiga@chromium.org
Components: OS>Kernel>Graphics
Owner: marc...@chromium.org
The regression is caused by mesa version update. crosreview.com/734620.
It was resolved by merely reverting crosreview.com/734620 and all the media-libs/mesa patches merged after the version update (i.e. crosreview.com/196170, crosreview.com/742244 and crosreview.com/735325).

marcheu@, can you take a look or assign a better owner for this issue?

Thanks.


Comment 4 by hiroh@chromium.org, Nov 21 2017

Hi, marcheu@. Is there any update?

Comment 5 by hiroh@chromium.org, Dec 13 2017

Hmm, I look the graph again today.
The value is still higher.
On the other hand, the frame drop rate of video_PlaybackPerf is small.
So this regression will not affect to users directly.
However, may I please consider to solve this regression? 
https://chromeperf.appspot.com/report?
sid=598ce620285349ddc0f7cf090dbc0321af8b430fd74b398d06bbae8acefa4105&start_rev=32390271003202300&end_rev=32870001020800000&rev=32530001007700000

Thanks.
Cc: marc...@chromium.org
Labels: -Pri-1 Pri-2
Owner: pwang@chromium.org
It seems related to kernel 3.8, which tells me it's probably the no_reloc change. pwang@ can tell us if it's the same issue or not.

In any case, it's only affecting 4K videos on intel-based kernel 3.8 devices, so it's not p1.

Comment 7 by pwang@chromium.org, Dec 20 2017

Test on my link.
I do not think this problem is the same as the no_reloc change as the value is high in mesa commit 12a77f391f, which is one commit before commit 3f353342a6 NO_RELOC introduced. 
It may be related to the previous graphics_VTSwitch flaky that we observed in  crbug.com/781884 .

BTW, one thing I noticed is that if we apply the tot mesa(34838c221260f961140040416b1a84b490448ac1) instead of our pinned version, the bug is fixed.
Ah ok, thanks for investigating. We can wait until the next mesa uprev then.

Comment 9 by hiroh@chromium.org, Dec 20 2017

Thanks for investigating.
When is the next mesa version update going to happen?
May I ask for an update on the status of this issue please? From the graphs it appears that this is still happening? Thanks!

Comment 12 by pwang@chromium.org, Jan 25 2018

Status: Fixed (was: Assigned)
Labels: M-64 M-65
Status: Assigned (was: Fixed)
Since this was reported on 10077.0.0, both M64 and M65 are probably affected?
Should we consider merging? Thanks!

Comment 14 by pwang@chromium.org, Jan 26 2018

Would like to merge this to 64 65 after it is verified. Feel free to cherry-pick if you would like to make it pushed to the tree sooner.
Project Member

Comment 15 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Feb 2 2018

Labels: merge-merged-release-R65-10323.B
The following revision refers to this bug:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/overlays/chromiumos-overlay/+/1437dc8bf1027271debf4edffce8511f4cec1104

commit 1437dc8bf1027271debf4edffce8511f4cec1104
Author: Po-Hsien Wang <pwang@chromium.org>
Date: Fri Feb 02 00:25:25 2018

mesa: flush after fallback texture

Fix issue that driver are failing to operates the same fallback texture.

BUG= chromium:780368 
TEST=test on my own link
     test_that link video_VDAPerf.h264.4k

Change-Id: Ie09de707c688fdd803987fe6fdb3e2654cab70df
Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/879963
Commit-Ready: Chad Versace <chadversary@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Po-Hsien Wang <pwang@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Chad Versace <chadversary@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Stéphane Marchesin <marcheu@chromium.org>
(cherry picked from commit 806b6d0fddc4ee12c3094e6e9d4691fa9c7d2b73)
Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/887928
Reviewed-by: Po-Hsien Wang <pwang@chromium.org>
Commit-Queue: Po-Hsien Wang <pwang@chromium.org>

[modify] https://crrev.com/1437dc8bf1027271debf4edffce8511f4cec1104/media-libs/mesa/mesa-17.2.3.ebuild
[modify] https://crrev.com/1437dc8bf1027271debf4edffce8511f4cec1104/media-libs/mesa/mesa-9999.ebuild
[add] https://crrev.com/1437dc8bf1027271debf4edffce8511f4cec1104/media-libs/mesa/files/17.3-Flush-After-Fallback-Texture.patch

Comment 16 by hiroh@chromium.org, Mar 14 2018

Status: Verified (was: Assigned)

Sign in to add a comment