Issue metadata
Sign in to add a comment
|
21.2%-46.4% regression in v8.browsing_mobile-future at 604870:604956 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
Issue descriptionSee the link to graphs below.
,
Nov 5
📍 Pinpoint job started. https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/106db035e40000
,
Nov 8
📍 Found significant differences after each of 2 commits. https://pinpoint-dot-chromeperf.appspot.com/job/106db035e40000 [Intl] Clean up Intl::GetStringOption by ftang@chromium.org https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/d44ed132d1faa646c18e6b99e11146ec7f0bd1cf total:500ms_window:renderer_eqt:v8:execute: 1.772e+04 → 1.824e+04 (+527) [Intl] Move cachedOrNewService to C++ w/o caching by ftang@chromium.org https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/dffaff7769dd89670a897d1adc50639b8655bf39 total:500ms_window:renderer_eqt:v8:execute: 1.798e+04 → 2.075e+04 (+2769) Understanding performance regressions: http://g.co/ChromePerformanceRegressions Benchmark documentation link: None
,
Yesterday
(43 hours ago)
,
Today
(10 hours ago)
The regression caused by https://chromium.googlesource.com/v8/v8/+/dffaff7769dd89670a897d1adc50639b8655bf39 is already addressed by https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/v8/v8/+/1320892 in Nov 13. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
►
Sign in to add a comment |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Comment 1 by 42576172...@developer.gserviceaccount.com
, Nov 5