Open
Bug 1616887
Opened 4 years ago
Updated 2 years ago
[meta] Profiling improvements for Firefox on Android
Categories
(Core :: Gecko Profiler, task, P2)
Core
Gecko Profiler
Tracking
()
NEW
People
(Reporter: Harald, Unassigned)
References
(Depends on 11 open bugs)
Details
(Keywords: meta)
Set of bugs to improve the gecko profiler for Firefox/GeckoView on Android.
Reporter | ||
Updated•4 years ago
|
Depends on: 1618560
Depends on: 1464983
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•4 years ago
|
||
Via :mstange in https://github.com/firefox-devtools/profiler/issues/2475
The Fenix team is interested in using the Firefox profiler more. However, as I understand it, they aren't necessarily interested in the Gecko data, they're mostly interested in using the UI, and using it to understand regressions in automation perf tests. The data sources would be Java/Kotlin stacks and manual marker instrumentation in the Java/Kotlin code.
We should find out what we can do to make their lives easier.
The following questions come to mind:
- What automated performance tests does Fenix use? Which test harnesses do these run in? Which of them support Gecko profiling already? Which of them can capture Android traces? Which of them do we want to get profiles from?
- What are examples of manual instrumentation / markers that the Fenix team is thinking about adding?
- How much Gecko data is needed? Do these profiles require having both Java/Kotlin markers and Gecko things on the same timeline? Or should we treat this as an entirely new data source?
- Apparently nimbledroid automatically generated some kind of profiling data. What type of profile did it generate (example profile?)? What needs to be done to generate similar data in our non-nimbledroid test harnesses?
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•4 years ago
|
||
Via mcomella
- I've heard profiling startup is hard
- In debuggable=true builds, reported JVM performance is not very trustworthy. I've heard the Profiler can run on debuggable=false builds: it could be cool to warn devs if the build is debuggable about this (note: the AS profiler doesn't support profiling without debuggable=true)
- In my experience with the Android profiler working on startup, I also wish it told me:
- Which methods are touching the disk
- When is the CPU bottlenecked (i.e. maxed out across all cores)? We have many tiny tasks across many different threads but these don't map to cores so it's hard to determine where bottlenecks occur except in theory
- When are new threads created (so I can determine what impact that's having on startup)
Depends on: 1630895
Comment 3•4 years ago
|
||
Another list from Markus:
- it doesn't start early enough
- it might have a bit more overhead than the android sampling profiler, but we haven't measured that
Depends on: 1642677
Depends on: 1651047
Depends on: 1659103
Depends on: 1704091
Depends on: 1710477
Depends on: 1715286
Depends on: 1759550
Depends on: 1760716
Updated•2 years ago
|
Severity: normal → S3
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•