1601588 - 2.41 - 3.69% raptor-tp6-twitch-firefox-cold (windows7-32-shippable) regression on push f4f9195bd6284cf8801a8eeed21bf9b0d827d0be (Mon December 2 2019)

Status: RESOLVED INVALID

(Core :: Layout, defect)

Description

[Marian Raiciof [:marauder]]

Raptor has detected a Firefox performance regression from push:

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/autoland/pushloghtml?changeset=f4f9195bd6284cf8801a8eeed21bf9b0d827d0be

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

Regressions:

4% raptor-tp6-twitch-firefox-cold windows7-32-shippable opt 260.18 -> 269.78
2% raptor-tp6-twitch-firefox-cold windows7-32-shippable opt 259.97 -> 266.25

You can find links to graphs and comparison views for each of the above tests at: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/perf.html#/alerts?id=24270

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 Raptor jobs in a pushlog format.

To learn more about the regressing test(s) or reproducing them, please see: https://wiki.mozilla.org/TestEngineering/Performance/Raptor

*** 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: https://wiki.mozilla.org/TestEngineering/Performance/Talos/RegressionBugsHandling

Comment 1

[Ting-Yu Lin [:TYLin] (PST, UTC-8)]

I believe this performance regression is likely noise. The patch in bug 1594937 didn't modify gecko behavior. It just removed a bunch of reftests and tweaked test expectations. Could we re-evaluate the regression?

Comment 2

[Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio)]

Yes, this seems wrong. The graph recovered, so probably just noise.

Comment 3

[Marian Raiciof [:marauder]]

Thanks for the updates.
We had some blockers on backfill and retriggers because of coalescing and superseeding.