Gaia: 83a63e0e6fcc22c6a74b06ef77b88d5049719cad Gecko: 4f049c08e74aab39ee81e7c6e7fcee311a1868b0 The BrowserMark process is a simple packaged web app that sets a 5 second interval to change the source of an iframe. A random number is used to prevent caching. setInterval(function () { $('iframe').attr('src', 'http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox?rand=' + Date.now()); }, 5000); 5x 60second kernel traces were averaged and divided by 60 in order to produce the attached pdf. So each value is the time in ms out of one second. The expectation is that Firefox OS uses equal or less CPU time than Android while browsing.

Thinker, can you take a look at this?

I don't really understand the numbers. Are they the process's CPU time in ms?

Yes the numbers are the process's CPU time in ms over a period of one second.

(In reply to Nicholas Troast [:ntroast] from comment #3) > Yes the numbers are the process's CPU time in ms over a period of one second. May I know how many CPUs are running when you run this app and what are the frequencies of CPUs?

(In reply to Ken Chang[:ken] from comment #4) > May I know how many CPUs are running when you run this app and what are the > frequencies of CPUs? 4 cores @ 1.3GHz

Ken, is your team looking at this one?

(In reply to Dylan Oliver [:doliver] from comment #6) > Ken, is your team looking at this one? Hi Dylan, We aren't confident that we can fix this issue in 2.2. But Thinker's team will keep looking into this problem.

[Tracking Requested - why for this release]: Noted as performance wanted bug to be care in future release. I suggest not in v2.2.

(In reply to Nicholas Troast [:ntroast] from comment #5) > (In reply to Ken Chang[:ken] from comment #4) > > May I know how many CPUs are running when you run this app and what are the > > frequencies of CPUs? > > 4 cores @ 1.3GHz Hmm, that means that Firefox is run by 4 cores with 1.3 GHz while doing this test. And another thing I learned from Dylan is that this problem is relevant to the power consumption. I wonder if we could have your power consumption datums of Android and Firefox while doing this test.

Ni Dylan and Nicolas, should we move it out from v2.2?

Confirmed that we will move this off the 2.2 list. Bumping to 3.0? to retain visibility.

Removing dependency on CAF 2.2, per agreement with partner.

Hi Thinker, Is there any progress on this issue? Or are there maybe some other more specific bugs that we should be watching for 2.5?

Ken, see comment #13 -- is there some activity on this topic that we can/should be tracking for 2.5?

Dylan, we haven't start profile in bug yet. I will request issue profile. Thanks.

Clearing blocking request for now and will leave it to Bobby to nominate specific work that needs to be included based on the analysis.