restructure results

1 files changed, 25 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/hypervisor/1871842 b/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/hypervisor/1871842
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..9f1d0352
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/hypervisor/1871842
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+<think>
+Okay, so I'm trying to classify this bug report from QEMU. Let me read through it carefully.
+
+The user is reporting an issue with QEMU when using AMD EPYC-v2 CPUs. The problem arises during SMP (Symmetric Multi-Processing) tests of their L4Re microkernel. The kernel isn't recognizing APs (Asynchronous Processors), which are essential for multiprocessing.
+
+From the report, it looks like the CPUID leaf 0x8000'0008 is giving inconsistent results between the physical machine and QEMU's emulation. On the host, the ECX value has all four bits set, indicating multiple cores. But in QEMU, when using certain parameters, ECX is zero, which suggests it thinks there's only one core.
+
+The user also experimented with different -smp options. For example, without any additional settings, ECX was 0x0. When they added "cores=4", ECX became 0x3 (which is binary 0011), indicating three cores? Wait, maybe I should check what each bit represents. Oh right, the ECX field for leaf 0x8000'0008 reports the number of APs per processor in bits 0-2.
+
+The user noticed that when they used -smp 4, the ECX was zero, which is wrong because it should reflect the actual cores. But when they added "cores=4", it showed 3 (binary 11) as NC field, and similarly for other configurations.
+
+They also mentioned that the physical machine's MADT (Multiple APICs Description Table) shows four local APICs, but CPUID reports a single core in QEMU. This mismatch is causing their kernel to not recognize APs.
+
+Looking at the possible categories: mistranslation, assembly lowering, device, graphic, socket, network, KVM, boot, vnc, debug, files, permissions, performance, kernel, peripherals, hypervisor, or other.
+
+The issue seems related to how QEMU reports CPU information, specifically the CPUID leaf. This is part of the x86_64 emulation in QEMU. The problem arises when using KVM acceleration because the host's CPU features are being passed through incorrectly.
+
+In the bug report, the user refers to QEMU's source code where the CPUID handling is done (target/i386/cpu.c). This suggests it's an issue with how QEMU emulates or translates CPU information for the guest OS. Since this is related to virtualization and CPU feature reporting under KVM, which is part of the hypervisor layer, I think the category should be 'hypervisor'.
+
+Wait, but another angle: the problem might be in the way QEMU's CPU model reports the number of cores, which affects how the guest OS detects hardware. Since this involves the virtualization layer providing incorrect information to the guest, it's definitely a hypervisor issue.
+
+So, after considering all aspects, the category is 'hypervisor'.
+</think>
+
+hypervisor
\ No newline at end of file