Closed
Bug 1171489
Opened 9 years ago
Closed 9 years ago
FPS reporting still inaccurate
Categories
(DevTools :: Performance Tools (Profiler/Timeline), defect)
Tracking
(firefox41 affected, firefox42 fixed)
RESOLVED
FIXED
Firefox 42
People
(Reporter: jsantell, Assigned: jsantell)
References
Details
Attachments
(3 files, 1 obsolete file)
(deleted),
application/json
|
Details | |
(deleted),
patch
|
vporof
:
review-
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
vporof
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Thought this was fixed, but looks like that's not the case!
Chenxia recorded a profile from a nightly fennec (on device, of an `about:*` page) yesterday and the FPS graph is suspiciously flat, reporting a 120+ average FPS.
(Also if you haven't seen a recording from fennec device, check it out, frame pseudostacks are a bit different)
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•9 years ago
|
||
last file was corrupted, here we go
Attachment #8615349 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Blocks: perf-tools-fx42
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•9 years ago
|
||
This gets close. We also have duration differences in the last recorded tick and total duration of the profile. I suspect this'll be cleaned out once there's a real performance actor, but this fixes the > 60FPS issues.
Comment 3•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8635547 [details] [diff] [review]
1171489-max-fps.patch
Review of attachment 8635547 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think this is an appropriate fix. We should find out *why* that number gets so high, not just blindingly clamp it.
Attachment #8635547 -
Flags: review?(vporof) → review+
Comment 4•9 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8635547 [details] [diff] [review]
1171489-max-fps.patch
Muscle memory made me r+ when I wanted to r-
Attachment #8635547 -
Flags: review+ → review-
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•9 years ago
|
||
Look at the attached json -- the ticks timestamps:
"1446.665648000002","1496.5664580000011","1496.9937430000027" ,"1497.146345000001","1503.1588580000025","1503.341980000001","1503.5251020000032","1690.7370670000018","1690.9 201890000004","1691.042271000002","1742.0112920000029","1742.1333730000042","1742.2249340000053","1788.18861600 0003","1788.3106970000008","1788.402258000002","1799.9999990000033","1800.1220810000013","1800.2136420000024"," 1820.1434450000052","1820.2655259999992","1820.3570880000007","1833.297725000004"
It's very possible to have ticks faster than ~16ms resulting in > 60FPS with request animation frame. Is there some perspective I don't understand?
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•9 years ago
|
||
And how this is calculated is duration divided by # of frames (ticks.length), so it's pretty straight forward how we can get > 60 FPS -- I think this can be further improved once the end times are in sync (right now the ticks stop recording with some extra room in the profiler (probably should just assume 60 FPS at any discrepency in end times)
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•9 years ago
|
||
This occurs when having a document with an iframe, and refreshing, causes us to count multiple docshells. Got a fix, just need a test.
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•9 years ago
|
||
I think this fixes it for real. The tests seem wonky, got any better ideas? If we can get this in for Fx42 on Monday that'd be awesome
Attachment #8645279 -
Flags: review?(vporof)
Comment 9•9 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Jordan Santell [:jsantell] [@jsantell] from comment #7)
> This occurs when having a document with an iframe, and refreshing, causes us
> to count multiple docshells. Got a fix, just need a test.
Knew it! Reviewing.
Updated•9 years ago
|
Attachment #8645279 -
Flags: review?(vporof) → review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Updated•9 years ago
|
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•9 years ago
|
||
Made the test more flexible, firing up the mochitest other tests again: https://treeherder.mozilla.org/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=05ff683f4893
Comment 12•9 years ago
|
||
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 9 years ago
status-firefox42:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Firefox 42
Updated•6 years ago
|
Product: Firefox → DevTools
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•