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

Issue 800010 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: Duplicate
Merged: issue 798344
Owner:
zmo@chromium.org
Closed: Jan 2018
Cc:
█ kbr@chromium.org
wfh@chromium.org
piman@chromium.org
tguilbert@chromium.org
zmo@chromium.org
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

94.1% regression in media.desktop at 526072:526132

Project Member Reported by tguilbert@chromium.org, Jan 8 2018 
See the link to graphs below.
Project Member

Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Jan 8 2018 

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=800010

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=1f2eb5268a05295d13e1cd8f2efeb675ff15e5ad06243adff572de201eb1444f


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

chromium-rel-win8-dual
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Jan 8 2018

Cc: kbr@chromium.org zmo@chromium.org wfh@chromium.org piman@chromium.org
Owner: zmo@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
📍 Found a significant difference after 1 commit.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/12c28607040000

Move SwiftShader decision from browser process to GPU process.
By zmo@chromium.org · Sat Dec 23 00:54:54 2017
chromium @ 5032192afb26a7b0e3acda4c735d1211f97bd52a

Understanding performance regressions:
  http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions

Comment 4 by zmo@chromium.org, Jan 8 2018

Mergedinto: 798344
Status: Duplicate (was: Assigned)
This is another case of SwiftShader change.

Unfortunately one of the affected bots, Win-Intel-GPU-Perf, is not running on real GPU at all.  Looking at Telemetry log, Chrome couldn't identify the GPU (returns vendor/device = 0/0), so it falls back to SwiftShader.
►

Sign in to add a comment