Closed
Bug 1089768
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Intermittent 113% Linux32 SVG Opacity Regression on Inbound (v.36) Oct 26 from push f51420708a03
Categories
(Core :: SVG, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WORKSFORME
People
(Reporter: jmaher, Unassigned)
References
Details
(Keywords: perf, regression, Whiteboard: [talos_regression])
We see a larger regression on linux32 here on graph server:
http://graphs.mozilla.org/graph.html#tests=%5B%5B225,131,33%5D%5D&sel=1413826828179,1414431628179&displayrange=7&datatype=running
I did some retriggers on tbpl:
https://tbpl.mozilla.org/?tree=Mozilla-Inbound&fromchange=60deb05c4c31&tochange=7e8eda44373c&jobname=Ubuntu%20HW%2012.04%20mozilla-inbound%20talos%20svgr
The changeset in question is:
http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/pushloghtml?fromchange=d09caccfd31b&tochange=f51420708a03
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
This isn't a straight regression. The numbers are jumping up and down between where they used to be and the regressed maximum.
Ubuntu HW 12.04 and this test also have a history of exhibiting this behavior every so often. I've no idea why every so often it jumps up often to double the amount of time it was previously taking on this OS.
Ubuntu HW 12.04 x64 is unchanged, as is typically the case.
As was the case for bug 1014789, I won't be surprised if we wontfix this.
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
so this showed up on Aurora (v.35) from this push:
http://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-aurora/pushloghtml?changeset=f59f7d0605b8
Looking at the graph:
http://graphs.mozilla.org/graph.html#tests=%5B%5B225,52,33%5D%5D&sel=none&displayrange=90&datatype=running
it shows some multi modality in the test. Quite possible the svg opacity test needs to be re-evaluated?
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
We tried to re-evaluate tsvg-opacity at bug 1027481, and we sort of concluded that it's still working well.
I never liked this test, but it seems(ed?) to be working, and I don't really know what to change in order to make it better or more reliable.
I think it would be best to understand first why did these changesets change the way the test behaves - only on Ubuntu 32. If we can do that then we could probably improve the test.
But as long as the same test which runs on seemingly consistent setup produces such noisy results without anyone understanding why, I don't think we have a starting point to re-evaluate the test.
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
Bas thought that the might be to do with XLib backed cairo treating paths in a more optimized way to rectangles.
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
I do not see this on mozilla-beta, can we close this?
Reporter | ||
Updated•10 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•