Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
24% regression in blink_perf.canvas at 582046:582108 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Aug 16
📍 Pinpoint job started. https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/14b3e0fa640000
,
Aug 20
📍 Found a significant difference after 1 commit. https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/14b3e0fa640000 Introduced blink::mojom::WebUsbService with restricted methods. by donna.wu@intel.com https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/838ac3604d917b78db1492344ead40d36cbd2b12 24.99 → 18.55 (-6.438) Understanding performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions
,
Nov 6
Reilly@, I looked at the implementation of createImageBitmap() according to the reported test case. But it seems not be related with USB. I supposed that the CL will only affect WebUSB in the renderer. Any hints?
,
Nov 6
,
Nov 6
It looks like this benchmark is oscillating between two results on a regular basis (see the graphs at the link above). It is unlikely that Donna's change is related. Reassigning to tdresser@ to look at the overall behavior of this benchmark.
,
Nov 6
,
Nov 19
Over to fserb@, who is an owner of this benchmark.
,
Nov 19
This was just a flakiness on the test. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Aug 16