New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 888060 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Duplicate
Owner:
Closed: Sep 24
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

5.4%-32.9% regression in media.mobile at 592330:592522

Project Member Reported by chcunningham@chromium.org, Sep 21

Issue description

See the link to graphs below.
 
All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=888060

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=b3feef66c283e0be8dacfe8d9e20f8160fc829437866195bcc8bcfb8481c6417


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

Android Nexus5 Perf
Win 7 Nvidia GPU Perf
android-nexus5x-perf

media.mobile - Benchmark documentation link:
  None

media.desktop - Benchmark documentation link:
  None
Cc: kylec...@chromium.org
Owner: kylec...@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
📍 Found a significant difference after 1 commit.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/16dfff97640000

Add memory dump support to VizProcessContextProvider. by kylechar@chromium.org
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/e7eca0a627c8289ec11efd27a26df8fe5c81e7e7
1.571e+07 → 2.082e+07 (+5.112e+06)

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

Benchmark documentation link:
  None
The alert has 19 graphs related to memory:chrome:all_processes:reported_by_chrome:gpu:effective_size_avg.
Mergedinto: 887311
Status: Duplicate (was: Assigned)

Sign in to add a comment