DevTools: Switch to using fast stack iterator to collect stacks during timeline recording.

DevTools: Switch to using fast stack iterator to collect stacks during timeline recording.

Stacks for events are now available only when JS profiler is enabled.

BUG=579191
Committed: https://crrev.com/7384f82925b78f48aa68caf62850d24f53f49233
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#372145}

[alph, 2016-01-23 02:24:38]

alph@chromium.org changed reviewers:
+ caseq@chromium.org, pfeldman@chromium.org

[caseq, 2016-01-25 19:18:36]

Looks mostly good, but let's avoid regressing tests and handling of top-level
frame in Timeline.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/inspector/timeline-test.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/inspector/timeline-test.js:83:
panel._captureJSProfileSetting.set(true);
Hm... Looks like we can't do this before we fix "children are longer than
parent" problem, otherwise the test will become way more flaky.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-animation-frame-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-animation-frame-expected.txt:16:
Text details for RequestAnimationFrame: null
why is this gone?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-id-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-id-expected.txt:7:
details.textContent for TimerInstall event: '(program):1'
This also looks like a regression.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-expected.txt:15:
------------------------------------> Timestamp: Foo
Looks like we might want to keep sampling off for some tests.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js:195:
stackTrace.splice(0, 1);
stackTrace.shift()? Also, consider moving into the conditional above and doing
before reverse(), so you can pop() instead.

[caseq, 2016-01-25 19:57:24]

The CQ bit was checked by caseq@chromium.org to run a CQ dry run

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-25 19:57:57]

Dry run: CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1624783002/1
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1624783002/1

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-25 20:15:42]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-25 20:15:43]

Dry run: Try jobs failed on following builders:
  cast_shell_android on tryserver.chromium.android (JOB_FAILED,
https://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.android/builders/cast_shell_a...)
  chromeos_daisy_chromium_compile_only_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux
(JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromeos_daisy_...)
  linux_chromium_compile_dbg_32_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)
  mac_chromium_gn_rel on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_gn_r...)

[alph, 2016-01-26 00:58:49]

ptal

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/inspector/timeline-test.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/inspector/timeline-test.js:83:
panel._captureJSProfileSetting.set(true);
On 2016/01/25 19:18:36, caseq wrote:
> Hm... Looks like we can't do this before we fix "children are longer than
> parent" problem, otherwise the test will become way more flaky.

The patch addresses this issue as well.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-animation-frame-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-animation-frame-expected.txt:16:
Text details for RequestAnimationFrame: null
On 2016/01/25 19:18:36, caseq wrote:
> why is this gone?

That's because it's now collects systems frames as well, so the system frame is
the function of requestAnimationFrame which url is missing.
Fixed that.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-id-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-id-expected.txt:7:
details.textContent for TimerInstall event: '(program):1'
On 2016/01/25 19:18:36, caseq wrote:
> This also looks like a regression.

Ditto. Fixed.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/LayoutTe...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-expected.txt:15:
------------------------------------> Timestamp: Foo
On 2016/01/25 19:18:36, caseq wrote:
> Looks like we might want to keep sampling off for some tests.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/1/third_party/WebKit/Source/d...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js:195:
stackTrace.splice(0, 1);
On 2016/01/25 19:18:36, caseq wrote:
> stackTrace.shift()? Also, consider moving into the conditional above and doing
> before reverse(), so you can pop() instead.

Acknowledged.

[caseq, 2016-01-26 01:22:04]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/inspector/timeline-test.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/inspector/timeline-test.js:74:
InspectorTest.startTimeline = function(callback, disableSampling)
callback should always be last.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-mark-timeline-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-mark-timeline-expected.txt:13:
stackTrace : <object>
why two stackTraces?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-receive-response-event-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-receive-response-event-expected.txt:3:
ResourceSendRequest
Should we disable samples for this one?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-tag-1-expected.txt
(left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-tag-1-expected.txt:6:
----> Timestamp: SCRIPT TAG
why is this gone?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-expected.txt:15:
------------------------------------> Timestamp: Foo
disable samples?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-timer-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-timer-expected.txt:70:
Text details for TimerFire: null
should this have location?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineUIUtils.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineUIUtils.js:235:
WebInspector.TimelineUIUtils.getTopUserFrame = function(event)
no get prefixes please.

[alph, 2016-01-26 02:04:51]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/inspector/timeline-test.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/http/tests/inspector/timeline-test.js:74:
InspectorTest.startTimeline = function(callback, disableSampling)
On 2016/01/26 01:22:04, caseq wrote:
> callback should always be last.

Acknowledged.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-mark-timeline-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-mark-timeline-expected.txt:13:
stackTrace : <object>
On 2016/01/26 01:22:04, caseq wrote:
> why two stackTraces?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-receive-response-event-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-receive-response-event-expected.txt:3:
ResourceSendRequest
On 2016/01/26 01:22:04, caseq wrote:
> Should we disable samples for this one?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-tag-1-expected.txt
(left):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-tag-1-expected.txt:6:
----> Timestamp: SCRIPT TAG
On 2016/01/26 01:22:04, caseq wrote:
> why is this gone?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-expected.txt:15:
------------------------------------> Timestamp: Foo
On 2016/01/26 01:22:04, caseq wrote:
> disable samples?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-timer-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-timer-expected.txt:70:
Text details for TimerFire: null
On 2016/01/26 01:22:04, caseq wrote:
> should this have location?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineUIUtils.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/20001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineUIUtils.js:235:
WebInspector.TimelineUIUtils.getTopUserFrame = function(event)
On 2016/01/26 01:22:04, caseq wrote:
> no get prefixes please.

Done.

[caseq, 2016-01-26 02:09:42]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/40001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/40001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js:189:
e["stackTrace"] = stackTrace;
e.stackTrace = stackTrace

[alph, 2016-01-26 02:12:50]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/40001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/40001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js:189:
e["stackTrace"] = stackTrace;
On 2016/01/26 02:09:42, caseq wrote:
> e.stackTrace = stackTrace

Done.

[alph, 2016-01-27 01:52:17]

ping

[alph, 2016-01-27 18:21:04]

On 2016/01/27 01:52:17, alph wrote:
> ping

@pfeldman Could you please take a look.

[pfeldman, 2016-01-27 18:38:36]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-aggregated-details-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-aggregated-details-expected.txt:3:
a: 0.000  17.030
Is there an explanation to these +9.0?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-js-callstacks-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-js-callstacks-expected.txt:3:
JSFrame: 211.000 / 17.030 a
same here.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-id-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-id-expected.txt:6:
detailsTextContent for TimerInstall event: 'performActions.js:1'
The timer is still installed on the line 3, why did this change?

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-stamp-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-stamp-expected.txt:15:
Text details for TimeStamp: timeline-time-stamp.html:7
You no longer specify the line number for the binding call, but expose the line
number of the topmost function call instead. This might be an issue.

[caseq, 2016-01-27 19:40:02]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/externs.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/externs.js:189:
Array.prototype.find = function(callback, thisArg) {}
move to es6.js?

[alph, 2016-01-27 22:31:25]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-aggregated-details-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-aggregated-details-expected.txt:3:
a: 0.000  17.030
On 2016/01/27 18:38:36, pfeldman wrote:
> Is there an explanation to these +9.0?

Fixed.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-js-callstacks-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-js-callstacks-expected.txt:3:
JSFrame: 211.000 / 17.030 a
On 2016/01/27 18:38:36, pfeldman wrote:
> same here.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-id-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-script-id-expected.txt:6:
detailsTextContent for TimerInstall event: 'performActions.js:1'
On 2016/01/27 18:38:36, pfeldman wrote:
> The timer is still installed on the line 3, why did this change?

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
File
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-stamp-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Layo...
third_party/WebKit/LayoutTests/inspector/tracing/timeline-time-stamp-expected.txt:15:
Text details for TimeStamp: timeline-time-stamp.html:7
On 2016/01/27 18:38:36, pfeldman wrote:
> You no longer specify the line number for the binding call, but expose the
line
> number of the topmost function call instead. This might be an issue.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/externs.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/60001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/externs.js:189:
Array.prototype.find = function(callback, thisArg) {}
On 2016/01/27 19:40:02, caseq wrote:
> move to es6.js?

Done.

[caseq, 2016-01-27 23:03:56]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/80001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/inspector/InspectorTraceEvents.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/80001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/inspector/InspectorTraceEvents.cpp:59:
RefPtr<ScriptCallStack> scriptCallStack = currentScriptCallStack(1);
nit: put under if ()

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/80001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineUIUtils.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/80001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineUIUtils.js:235:
WebInspector.TimelineUIUtils.topUserFrame = function(event)
is this still necessary?

[alph, 2016-01-27 23:16:20]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/80001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/core/inspector/InspectorTraceEvents.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/80001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/core/inspector/InspectorTraceEvents.cpp:59:
RefPtr<ScriptCallStack> scriptCallStack = currentScriptCallStack(1);
On 2016/01/27 23:03:56, caseq wrote:
> nit: put under if ()

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/80001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineUIUtils.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/80001/third_party/WebKit/Sour...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineUIUtils.js:235:
WebInspector.TimelineUIUtils.topUserFrame = function(event)
On 2016/01/27 23:03:56, caseq wrote:
> is this still necessary?

Acknowledged.

[pfeldman, 2016-01-27 23:42:27]

lgtm

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js:184:
var stackTrace;
Annotate the type please.

[pfeldman, 2016-01-27 23:42:31]

lgtm

[alph, 2016-01-27 23:51:20]

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
File third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/diff/100001/third_party/WebKit/Sou...
third_party/WebKit/Source/devtools/front_end/timeline/TimelineJSProfile.js:184:
var stackTrace;
On 2016/01/27 23:42:27, pfeldman wrote:
> Annotate the type please.

Done.

[alph, 2016-01-27 23:53:59]

The CQ bit was checked by alph@chromium.org

[alph, 2016-01-27 23:54:00]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from caseq@chromium.org,
pfeldman@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/#ps120001
(title: "address pfeldman@ comments.")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-27 23:54:21]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1624783002/120001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1624783002/120001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 01:46:16]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 01:46:17]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  mac_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.mac (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.mac/builders/mac_chromium_rel_...)

[alph, 2016-01-28 02:17:01]

The CQ bit was checked by alph@chromium.org

[alph, 2016-01-28 02:17:01]

The patchset sent to the CQ was uploaded after l-g-t-m from caseq@chromium.org,
pfeldman@chromium.org
Link to the patchset: https://codereview.chromium.org/1624783002/#ps140001
(title: "update profiler tests")

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 02:19:09]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1624783002/140001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1624783002/140001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 03:35:05]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 03:35:06]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  linux_chromium_rel_ng on tryserver.chromium.linux (JOB_FAILED,
http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/linux_chromium_...)

[alph, 2016-01-28 18:49:05]

The CQ bit was checked by alph@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 18:49:43]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-status/1624783002/140001
View timeline at
 https://chromium-cq-status.appspot.com/patch-timeline/1624783002/140001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 19:44:52]

Committed patchset #8 (id:140001)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 19:45:56]

Description was changed from

==========
DevTools: Switch to using fast stack iterator to collect stacks during timeline
recording.

Stacks for events are now available only when JS profiler is enabled.

BUG=579191
==========

to

==========
DevTools: Switch to using fast stack iterator to collect stacks during timeline
recording.

Stacks for events are now available only when JS profiler is enabled.

BUG=579191

Committed: https://crrev.com/7384f82925b78f48aa68caf62850d24f53f49233
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#372145}
==========

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2016-01-28 19:46:02]

Patchset 8 (id:??) landed as
https://crrev.com/7384f82925b78f48aa68caf62850d24f53f49233
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#372145}

[Noel Gordon, 2016-01-29 01:57:47]

virtual/threaded/inspector/tracing/timeline-load-event.html
inspector/tracing/timeline-load-event.html

Started failing on the debug bots: expected?

https://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.webkit/builders/WebKit%20Linux%20%28dbg...
https://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.webkit/builders/WebKit%20Win7%20%28dbg%...

/me not gardening, just noticed that's all.

[Noel Gordon, 2016-01-29 01:58:24]

Description was changed from

==========
DevTools: Switch to using fast stack iterator to collect stacks during timeline
recording.

Stacks for events are now available only when JS profiler is enabled.

BUG=579191

Committed: https://crrev.com/7384f82925b78f48aa68caf62850d24f53f49233
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#372145}
==========

to

==========
DevTools: Switch to using fast stack iterator to collect stacks during timeline
recording.

Stacks for events are now available only when JS profiler is enabled.

BUG=579191

Committed: https://crrev.com/7384f82925b78f48aa68caf62850d24f53f49233
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#372145}
==========

[alph, 2016-01-29 02:12:10]

On 2016/01/29 01:57:47, noel gordon wrote:
> virtual/threaded/inspector/tracing/timeline-load-event.html
> inspector/tracing/timeline-load-event.html
> 
> Started failing on the debug bots: expected?
> 
>
https://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.webkit/builders/WebKit%20Linux%20%28dbg...
>
https://build.chromium.org/p/chromium.webkit/builders/WebKit%20Win7%20%28dbg%...
> 
> /me not gardening, just noticed that's all.

Thanks, looking into it.