1550409 - 0.49 - 5.66% Base Content Explicit (linux64-shippable, linux64-shippable-qr, windows7-32-shippable) regression on push 4daded6050788477db51b3ef552a839b545b406b (Wed Apr 24 2019)

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Core :: XUL, defect, P3)

Description

[Ionuț Goldan [:igoldan]]

We have detected an awsy regression from push:

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/pushloghtml?fromchange=c94a6d04f305dee0d8f49cea86ec7d410038ce23&tochange=4daded6050788477db51b3ef552a839b545b406b

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

Regressions:

6% Base Content Explicit windows7-32-shippable opt 7,338,410.67 -> 7,753,557.33
1% Base Content Explicit linux64-shippable opt 12,923,648.00 -> 13,009,920.00
0% Base Content Explicit linux64-shippable-qr opt 12,903,082.67 -> 12,966,400.00

You can find links to graphs and comparison views for each of the above tests at: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/perf.html#/alerts?id=20615

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 jobs in a pushlog format.

To learn more about the regressing test(s), please see: https://wiki.mozilla.org/AWSY/Tests

Comment 1

[Ionuț Goldan [:igoldan]]

Emilio, sorry for posting so late. There's a clear memory regression that got in, but I had to do lots & lots of test retriggers to identify it. I'm 80% sure I got this right so if this doesn't make sense, let me know.

Comment 2

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

I'm 99% sure it shouldn't be related to that patch... That patch converts a build-time switch in a run-time switch, but most importantly:

• That switch was already enabled on Windows (so regressing win7 seems impossible).
• The stylesheet that gains those rules isn't loaded in the content process (which is what that test is measuring).

Comment 3

[BugBot [:suhaib / :marco/ :calixte]]

The priority flag is not set for this bug.
:enndeakin, could you have a look please?

For more information, please visit auto_nag documentation.

Comment 4

[Neil Deakin]

I don't think i can answer that. It doesn't look like the patch could cause a windows regression as noticeable as that.

Comment 5

[BugBot [:suhaib / :marco/ :calixte]]

The priority flag is not set for this bug.
:enndeakin, could you have a look please?

For more information, please visit auto_nag documentation.

Comment 6

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Ionut, do you know how to move forward with this? I can back out that patch if you want, but it seems silly since as I said these stylesheets are not even loaded in the content process.

Comment 7

[Ionuț Goldan [:igoldan]]

(In reply to Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) from comment #6)

Ionut, do you know how to move forward with this? I can back out that patch if you want, but it seems silly since as I said these stylesheets are not even loaded in the content process.

Let me simulate a backout via Try.

Comment 8

[Ionuț Goldan [:igoldan]]

Before/after comparison will be available soon.

Comment 9

[Olli Pettay [:smaug][[e-mail]]]

Based on comment 2 and comment 8, marking this WONTFIX. There isn't enough information here, and it is unlikely that bug 1546542 caused the regression.