Closed Bug 1489072 Opened Last year Closed Last year

1.7 - 2.59% ts_paint / ts_paint_webext (linux64) regression on push f4400f4e6b8500d2a7ebaacbaa1a361f18c9feac (Tue Sep 4 2018)


(Firefox :: PDF Viewer, defect, P1)




Firefox 64
Tracking Status
firefox-esr60 --- unaffected
firefox62 --- unaffected
firefox63 + fixed
firefox64 + fixed


(Reporter: jmaher, Assigned: kmag)


(Blocks 1 open bug)


(Keywords: perf, regression, talos-regression)


(1 file)

Talos has detected a Firefox performance regression from push:

As author of one of the patches included in that push, we need your help to address this regression.


  3%  ts_paint_webext linux64 opt e10s stylo     194.96 -> 200.00
  2%  ts_paint linux64 opt e10s stylo            196.00 -> 199.33

You can find links to graphs and comparison views for each of the above tests at:

On the page above you can see an alert for each affected platform as well as a link to a graph showing the history of scores for this test. There is also a link to a treeherder page showing the Talos jobs in a pushlog format.

To learn more about the regressing test(s), please see:

For information on reproducing and debugging the regression, either on try or locally, see:

*** Please let us know your plans within 3 business days, or the offending patch(es) will be backed out! ***

Our wiki page outlines the common responses and expectations:
:kmag, your change in bug 1481859 caused a talos performance regressions to startup times, can you please look into this?
Component: General → PDF Viewer
Flags: needinfo?(kmaglione+bmo)
Product: Testing → Firefox
Assignee: nobody → kmaglione+bmo
Flags: needinfo?(kmaglione+bmo)
:kmag, can you give an update here so we know if you are working on this and when we can expect a fix?
Flags: needinfo?(kmaglione+bmo)
:kmag, I have not heard anything here, should we back out?  We do have a policy within 3 business days to comment on the bug and explain the regression or an estimate and way to track when the work will be done.
I'm working on a fix. I should have one by the end of the week.
Flags: needinfo?(kmaglione+bmo)
Setting to P1 and CCing Pascal because of the relationship to bug 1481859, which is P1 and tracking 63.
Priority: -- → P1
:kmag, did you intend to ask :bdahl for a review in this bug?
Flags: needinfo?(kmaglione+bmo)
(In reply to Joel Maher ( :jmaher ) (UTC-4) from comment #9)
> :kmag, did you intend to ask :bdahl for a review in this bug?

It was done via Phabricator. Unfortunately, this is no longer apparent in bugzilla.
Flags: needinfo?(kmaglione+bmo)
got it; so many sources of truth these days.
Closed: Last year
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 64
The fix seems to have canceled the regressions above:

== Change summary for alert #16579 (as of Mon, 08 Oct 2018 18:57:37 GMT) ==


  2%  ts_paint_webext windows7-32 pgo e10s stylo     317.42 -> 310.67

For up to date results, see:
Please request beta approval for this. 
As depends on this bug.
Flags: needinfo?(kmaglione+bmo)
Comment on attachment 9014157 [details]
Bug 1489072: Fix startup perf regression in pdf.js init. r=bdahl

[Beta/Release Uplift Approval Request]

Feature/Bug causing the regression: Bug 1481859

User impact if declined: Startup performance regression.

Is this code covered by automated tests?: No

Has the fix been verified in Nightly?: Yes

Needs manual test from QE?: No

If yes, steps to reproduce: 

List of other uplifts needed: Bug 1481859

Risk to taking this patch: Low

Why is the change risky/not risky? (and alternatives if risky): Worst case, something goes wrong with the cached state and the PDF viewer is either stuck enabled/disabled until a settings change. Alternatively, we land the other patch, but suffer a performance regression.

String changes made/needed:
Flags: needinfo?(kmaglione+bmo)
Attachment #9014157 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta?
Comment on attachment 9014157 [details]
Bug 1489072: Fix startup perf regression in pdf.js init. r=bdahl

Blocks bug 1481859, approved for 63.0b14.
Attachment #9014157 - Flags: approval-mozilla-beta? → approval-mozilla-beta+
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.