New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 891010 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: Untriaged
Owner: ----
Cc:
rakina@chromium.org
tdres...@chromium.org
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression



Sign in to add a comment

10.3% regression in blink_perf.bindings at 594964:594983

Project Member Reported by tdres...@chromium.org, Oct 1 
See the link to graphs below.
Project Member

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

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=891010

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=be389a00ad9ce309caa4c8ebde024426037573071b58fa48feb189111dbb780a


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

android-nexus5x-perf

blink_perf.bindings - Benchmark documentation link:
  https://bit.ly/blink-perf-benchmarks
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 5

Cc: rakina@chromium.org
Owner: rakina@chromium.org
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
📍 Found a significant difference after 1 commit.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/123d34a7640000

Revert "Don't update the surface range at every activation" by rakina@chromium.org
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/2112dbffdd286898c8777fde20ec5451a04fcdea
first-child: 540.7 → 525.2 (-15.5)

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

Benchmark documentation link:
  https://bit.ly/blink-perf-benchmarks

Comment 4 by rakina@chromium.org, Oct 6

Owner: ----
Status: Untriaged (was: Assigned)
My CL was just a normal revert.
►

Sign in to add a comment