New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 893858 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Assigned
Owner:
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression

Blocked on:
issue 894529



Sign in to add a comment

6.5%-7.7% regression in media.desktop at 594789:595568

Project Member Reported by wolenetz@chromium.org, Oct 9

Issue description

These 5 alerts look valid. Starting a bisect.
 
All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=893858

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=1f483135d0acecbcee9d2908fb510028ceae0075f1bedf7c67134d5d0018e593


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

Win 7 Perf

media.desktop - Benchmark documentation link:
  None
📍 Couldn't reproduce a difference.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/148baed4e40000
Noisy repro. Retrying same range.
📍 Couldn't reproduce a difference.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/12a22a92e40000
📍 Couldn't reproduce a difference.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/1742ad4ce40000
Cc: simonh...@chromium.org
Components: Speed>Bisection
Owner: dtu@chromium.org
Each of #3, #7 and #8 show visible regression in the pinpoint graphs.
-> dtu@, cc+simonhatch@ for assistance obtaining a successful bisection. (I'm uncertain if bug 894529 is involved, since I didn't change the bisection range versus the alert on any of these attempts, but the bisection infra still failed to detect the regression culprit.)
Blockedon: 894529
Correction to links in #9: I meant "Each of #3, #6 and #8..."
Cc: -simonh...@chromium.org simonhatch@chromium.org
(simonhatch is on leave this quarter)

#3: shows a comparison_magnitude of 0.00776. I don't see a regression of that size on the graph. While the 4 commits do look a little different, it doesn't look significantly different to me, and I would call that a no repro.

#6: The graph appears to move down, up, then down, then up again. I think this is likely to be either an issue with noise in the metric (e.g. if it's affected by AFDO changes) or there are multiple small regressions in the range. I don't see a comparison_magnitude on that job, so it may have not been able to detect small regressions there.

#8: The graph does show a regression of size >0.00776, but there's no comparison_magnitude set on that job, so probably issue 894529.
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
This issue has an owner, a component and a priority, but is still listed as untriaged or unconfirmed. By definition, this bug is triaged. Changing status to "assigned". Please reach out to me if you disagree with how I've done this.

Sign in to add a comment