2.72% compiler_metrics num_static_constructors (Linux) regression on Fri June 23 2023
Categories
(Core :: Widget: Gtk, defect)
Tracking
()
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox-esr102 | --- | unaffected |
firefox114 | --- | unaffected |
firefox115 | --- | unaffected |
firefox116 | --- | wontfix |
People
(Reporter: afinder, Unassigned)
References
(Regression)
Details
(Keywords: perf-alert, regression)
Perfherder has detected a build_metrics performance regression from push bd328e6b49f984c8a1b8e2e0e0b2194267d023ac. As author of one of the patches included in that push, we need your help to address this regression.
Regressions:
Ratio | Test | Platform | Options | Absolute values (old vs new) |
---|---|---|---|---|
3% | compiler_metrics num_static_constructors | linux64 | x11 | 147.00 -> 151.00 |
Details of the alert can be found in the alert summary, including links to graphs and comparisons for each of the affected tests. Please follow our guide to handling regression bugs and let us know your plans within 3 business days, or the offending patch(es) may be backed out in accordance with our regression policy.
For more information on performance sheriffing please see our FAQ.
Isn't that Bug 1839922?
Comment 2•2 years ago
|
||
Set release status flags based on info from the regressing bug 1839599
Comment 3•2 years ago
|
||
Seems unlikely given this happened only for Linux+x11. Alex, what's the right push log?
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•2 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) from comment #3)
Seems unlikely given this happened only for Linux+x11. Alex, what's the right push log?
Thanks for the reply Emilio! Looks like the right push was ba9712fc3d709f77a7ccd71121c00a1e261e3184 as can be seen in this graph. Closing this defect as Invalid. Sorry for the confusion!
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•2 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Alex Finder from comment #4)
(In reply to Emilio Cobos Álvarez (:emilio) from comment #3)
Seems unlikely given this happened only for Linux+x11. Alex, what's the right push log?
Thanks for the reply Emilio! Looks like the right push was ba9712fc3d709f77a7ccd71121c00a1e261e3184 as can be seen in this graph. Closing this defect as Invalid. Sorry for the confusion!
Logged a separate defect for the mentioned push.
Reporter | ||
Updated•2 years ago
|
Updated•2 years ago
|
Description
•