New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 895360 link

Starred by 1 user
Status: WontFix
Owner:
r...@igalia.com
Closed: Dec 27
Cc:
npm@chromium.org
r...@igalia.com
e...@chromium.org
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug-Regression

Blocked on:
issue 895738


Sign in to add a comment

10.9% regression in rendering.mobile/tasks_per_frame_total_all at 598969:599042

Project Member Reported by npm@chromium.org, Oct 15 
See the link to graphs below.
Project Member

Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 15 

All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=895360

(For debugging:) Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?sid=64e60ee806e89f98b3a949916e081139d21ff9d50623c93ea2e219548c86fc23


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

android-nexus5x-perf

rendering.mobile - Benchmark documentation link:
  https://bit.ly/rendering-benchmarks
Project Member

Comment 3 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 15

Cc: r...@igalia.com
Owner: r...@igalia.com
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
📍 Found a significant difference after 1 commit.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/1617e12ee40000

Fix perf regression in LayoutBoxModelObject::RelativePositionOffset() by rego@igalia.com
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/4226ddf99103e493d7afb23a4c7902ee496108b6
tasks_per_frame_total_all: 66.29 → 72.04 (+5.755)

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

Benchmark documentation link:
  https://bit.ly/rendering-benchmarks

Comment 4 by r...@igalia.com, Oct 16 

 Issue 895361  has been merged into this issue.

Comment 5 by r...@igalia.com, Oct 16 

Please npm@ could you also run a pinpoint job for the same CL than the other  issue #895274 ? Thanks!

The CL is:
https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/1282124
Project Member

Comment 7 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Oct 16 

📍 Job complete. See results below.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/168923eae40000

Comment 8 by r...@igalia.com, Oct 31

Blockedon: 895738
Project Member

Comment 12 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 9 

📍 Job complete. See results below.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/15810865e40000
Project Member

Comment 14 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 20 

📍 Job complete. See results below.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/1201e813e40000
Project Member

Comment 16 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 21 

📍 Job complete. See results below.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/1220add0140000
Project Member

Comment 18 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 22 

📍 Found a significant difference after 1 commit.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/105c77e0140000

Fix perf regressions in LayoutBoxModelObject::RelativePositionOffset() by rego@igalia.com
https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/1347356/1
tasks_per_frame_total_all: 84.56 → No values

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

Benchmark documentation link:
  https://bit.ly/rendering-benchmarks
Project Member

Comment 20 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Nov 22 

📍 Couldn't reproduce a difference.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/166a0f8fe40000
Project Member

Comment 24 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Dec 3 

📍 Couldn't reproduce a difference.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/16d2d5bfe40000
Project Member

Comment 25 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Dec 3 

📍 Couldn't reproduce a difference.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/16529547e40000
Project Member

Comment 26 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com, Dec 4 

📍 Couldn't reproduce a difference.
https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/14fec213e40000

Comment 27 by r...@igalia.com, Dec 10

Cc: e...@chromium.org
I've been trying different things but I didn't find a solution.

I guess we might need to assume that this regression is due to the new code to fix  issue #835607 .
Could this be fine? Do you have any idea to explore?

Comment 28 by r...@igalia.com, Dec 27

Status: WontFix (was: Assigned)
As I didn't manage to fix the problem and got not feedback on the previous comment I'm closing this.

Please reopen if you think there's a better solution to fix the original problem without causing performance regressions here.
►

Sign in to add a comment