All smoke test for timeline-based is_fast measurement.

Add smoke test for timeline-based is_fast measurement.

BUG=

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=290093

[slamm, 2014-08-13 23:45:54]

Smoke test passes!

[nednguyen, 2014-08-14 01:33:47]

LGTM with nits

https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
File tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py:236:
self.assertEquals(expected_names, names)
Can you compare the two sets instead?

https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py:237: 
We can also assert duration >= 200 ms.

[slamm, 2014-08-14 17:27:09]

PTAL.

https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
File tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py:236:
self.assertEquals(expected_names, names)
On 2014/08/14 01:33:47, nednguyen wrote:
> Can you compare the two sets instead? 

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py:237: 
On 2014/08/14 01:33:47, nednguyen wrote:
> We can also assert duration >= 200 ms.

Done.

[slamm, 2014-08-14 17:28:17]

On 2014/08/14 17:27:09, slamm wrote:
> PTAL.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
> File tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py
> (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
> tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py:236:
> self.assertEquals(expected_names, names)
> On 2014/08/14 01:33:47, nednguyen wrote:
> > Can you compare the two sets instead? 
> 
> Done.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/diff/20001/tools/telemetry/telemetr...
> tools/telemetry/telemetry/web_perf/timeline_based_measurement_unittest.py:237:

> On 2014/08/14 01:33:47, nednguyen wrote:
> > We can also assert duration >= 200 ms.
> 
> Done.

Ah, I see you already LGTM'd.

[slamm, 2014-08-14 17:28:19]

The CQ bit was checked by slamm@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-14 17:30:42]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/slamm@chromium.org/477463002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-14 21:25:15]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium.linux
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)
  win_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)
  win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_x64_...)

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-14 21:32:07]

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

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-14 21:32:08]

Try jobs failed on following builders:
  chromium_presubmit on tryserver.chromium.linux
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.linux/builders/chromium_presub...)

[slamm, 2014-08-15 00:09:44]

The CQ bit was checked by slamm@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-15 00:14:12]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/slamm@chromium.org/477463002/40001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-15 02:23:42]

FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
The failing builders are:
  win_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)
  win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_x64_...)

[nednguyen, 2014-08-15 02:44:52]

On 2014/08/15 02:23:42, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
> The failing builders are:
>   win_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.win
>
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_rel_...)
>   win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
>
(http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/builders/win_chromium_x64_...)

The failure looks legit. I think you may have the problem with no cpu time on
window.

[nednguyen, 2014-08-15 02:44:57]

The CQ bit was unchecked by nednguyen@google.com

[chromium-reviews, 2014-08-15 16:42:09]

I updated the CL to not expect cpu_time for Windows.

The jank test is disabled for Windows:

 # Disabled since mainthread_jank metric is not supported on windows
platform.
 @benchmark.Disabled('win')
 def testMainthreadJankTimelineBasedMeasurement(self):

Further, the fast metric relies on the same underlying call:
GetOverlappedThreadTimeForSlice.

(I do not understand why that would be the case for Windows. I also do not
see any documentation for it.)

-slamm



On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 7:44 PM, <nednguyen@google.com> wrote:

> On 2014/08/15 02:23:42, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
>
>> FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
>> The failing builders are:
>>    win_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.win
>>
>
> (http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/
> builders/win_chromium_rel_swarming/builds/2028)
>
>>    win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
>>
>
> (http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/
> builders/win_chromium_x64_rel/builds/7095)
>
> The failure looks legit. I think you may have the problem with no cpu time
> on
> window.
>
> https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/
>

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[chromium-reviews, 2014-08-15 16:47:00]

BTW, I wanted to use a decorator to control the cpu check, however, I do
see how to do enabled-for-all-except-win.


On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Stephen Lamm <slamm@google.com> wrote:

> I updated the CL to not expect cpu_time for Windows.
>
> The jank test is disabled for Windows:
>
>  # Disabled since mainthread_jank metric is not supported on windows
> platform.
>  @benchmark.Disabled('win')
>  def testMainthreadJankTimelineBasedMeasurement(self):
>
> Further, the fast metric relies on the same underlying call:
> GetOverlappedThreadTimeForSlice.
>
> (I do not understand why that would be the case for Windows. I also do not
> see any documentation for it.)
>
> -slamm
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 7:44 PM, <nednguyen@google.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2014/08/15 02:23:42, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
>>
>>> FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
>>> The failing builders are:
>>>    win_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.win
>>>
>>
>> (http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/
>> builders/win_chromium_rel_swarming/builds/2028)
>>
>>>    win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
>>>
>>
>> (http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/
>> builders/win_chromium_x64_rel/builds/7095)
>>
>> The failure looks legit. I think you may have the problem with no cpu
>> time on
>> window.
>>
>> https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/
>>
>
>

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

[nednguyen, 2014-08-15 17:08:41]

On 2014/08/15 16:47:00, chromium-reviews wrote:
> BTW, I wanted to use a decorator to control the cpu check, however, I do
> see how to do enabled-for-all-except-win.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Stephen Lamm <mailto:slamm@google.com> wrote:
> 
> > I updated the CL to not expect cpu_time for Windows.
> >
> > The jank test is disabled for Windows:
> >
> >  # Disabled since mainthread_jank metric is not supported on windows
> > platform.
> >  @benchmark.Disabled('win')
> >  def testMainthreadJankTimelineBasedMeasurement(self):
> >
> > Further, the fast metric relies on the same underlying call:
> > GetOverlappedThreadTimeForSlice.
> >
> > (I do not understand why that would be the case for Windows. I also do not
> > see any documentation for it.)
> >
> > -slamm
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 7:44 PM, <mailto:nednguyen@google.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2014/08/15 02:23:42, I haz the power (commit-bot) wrote:
> >>
> >>> FYI, CQ is re-trying this CL (attempt #1).
> >>> The failing builders are:
> >>>    win_chromium_rel_swarming on tryserver.chromium.win
> >>>
> >>
> >> (http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/
> >> builders/win_chromium_rel_swarming/builds/2028)
> >>
> >>>    win_chromium_x64_rel on tryserver.chromium.win
> >>>
> >>
> >> (http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.win/
> >> builders/win_chromium_x64_rel/builds/7095)
> >>
> >> The failure looks legit. I think you may have the problem with no cpu
> >> time on
> >> window.
> >>
> >> https://codereview.chromium.org/477463002/
> >>
> >
> >
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email
> to mailto:chromium-reviews+unsubscribe@chromium.org.

Thanks, that's ok. I was thinking about s.t even more coarse, i.e: disable that
whole test on windows.

[nednguyen, 2014-08-15 17:08:45]

The CQ bit was checked by nednguyen@google.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-15 17:09:54]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/slamm@chromium.org/477463002/80001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-08-16 05:41:33]

Committed patchset #5 (80001) as 290093