7 files changed, 1 insertions, 170 deletions
diff --git a/classification/main.py b/classification/main.py
index 46ce6488..95ef8098 100755
--- a/classification/main.py
+++ b/classification/main.py
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ def main():
 
     bugs = list_files_recursive("../results/scraper/mailinglist")
     if args.minimal:
-        bugs = bugs + list_files_recursive("./semantic_issues")
+        bugs = bugs + list_files_recursive("../results/gitlab/scraper/semantic_issues")
     else:
         bugs = bugs + list_files_recursive("../results/scraper/launchpad")
         bugs = bugs + list_files_recursive("../results/scraper/gitlab/issues_text")
diff --git a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_addsubps b/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_addsubps
deleted file mode 100644
index 60438ff0..00000000
--- a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_addsubps
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,23 +0,0 @@
-x86 SSE/SSE2/SSE3 instruction semantic bugs with NaN
-
-Description of problem
-The result of SSE/SSE2/SSE3 instructions with NaN is different from the CPU. From Intel manual Volume 1 Appendix D.4.2.2, they defined the behavior of such instructions with NaN. But I think QEMU did not implement this semantic exactly because the byte result is different.
-
-Steps to reproduce
-
-Compile this code
-
-void main() {
-    asm("mov rax, 0x000000007fffffff; push rax; mov rax, 0x00000000ffffffff; push rax; movdqu XMM1, [rsp];");
-    asm("mov rax, 0x2e711de7aa46af1a; push rax; mov rax, 0x7fffffff7fffffff; push rax; movdqu XMM2, [rsp];");
-    asm("addsubps xmm1, xmm2");
-}
-
-Execute and compare the result with the CPU. This problem happens with other SSE/SSE2/SSE3 instructions specified in the manual, Volume 1 Appendix D.4.2.2.
-
-CPU xmm1[3] = 0xffffffff
-
-QEMU xmm1[3] = 0x7fffffff
-
-Additional information
-This bug is discovered by research conducted by KAIST SoftSec.
diff --git a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_adox b/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_adox
deleted file mode 100644
index 9f4471c9..00000000
--- a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_adox
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
-x86 ADOX and ADCX semantic bug
-Description of problem
-The result of instruction ADOX and ADCX are different from the CPU. The value of one of EFLAGS is different.
-
-Steps to reproduce
-
-Compile this code
-
-
-void main() {
-    asm("push 512; popfq;");
-    asm("mov rax, 0xffffffff84fdbf24");
-    asm("mov rbx, 0xb197d26043bec15d");
-    asm("adox eax, ebx");
-}
-
-
-
-Execute and compare the result with the CPU. This problem happens with ADCX, too (with CF).
-
-CPU
-
-OF = 0
-
-
-QEMU
-
-OF = 1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Additional information
-This bug is discovered by research conducted by KAIST SoftSec.
diff --git a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_bextr b/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_bextr
deleted file mode 100644
index dabe16ac..00000000
--- a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_bextr
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,25 +0,0 @@
-x86 BEXTR semantic bug
-Description of problem
-The result of instruction BEXTR is different with from the CPU. The value of destination register is different. I think QEMU does not consider the operand size limit.
-
-Steps to reproduce
-
-Compile this code
-
-void main() {
-    asm("mov rax, 0x17b3693f77fb6e9");
-    asm("mov rbx, 0x8f635a775ad3b9b4");
-    asm("mov rcx, 0xb717b75da9983018");
-    asm("bextr eax, ebx, ecx");
-}
-
-Execute and compare the result with the CPU.
-
-CPU
-RAX = 0x5a
-
-QEMU
-RAX = 0x635a775a
-
-Additional information
-This bug is discovered by research conducted by KAIST SoftSec.
diff --git a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_blsi b/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_blsi
deleted file mode 100644
index 92ff92b0..00000000
--- a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_blsi
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,20 +0,0 @@
-x86 BLSI and BLSR semantic bug
-Description of problem
-The result of instruction BLSI and BLSR is different from the CPU. The value of CF is different.
-
-Steps to reproduce
-
-Compile this code
-
-
-void main() {
-    asm("blsi rax, rbx");
-}
-
-
-
-Execute and compare the result with the CPU. The value of CF is exactly the opposite. This problem happens with BLSR, too.
-
-
-Additional information
-This bug is discovered by research conducted by KAIST SoftSec.
diff --git a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_blsmsk b/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_blsmsk
deleted file mode 100644
index b950faa2..00000000
--- a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_blsmsk
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,27 +0,0 @@
-x86 BLSMSK semantic bug
-Description of problem
-The result of instruction BLSMSK is different with from the CPU. The value of CF is different.
-
-Steps to reproduce
-
-Compile this code
-
-void main() {
-    asm("mov rax, 0x65b2e276ad27c67");
-    asm("mov rbx, 0x62f34955226b2b5d");
-    asm("blsmsk eax, ebx");
-}
-
-Execute and compare the result with the CPU.
-
-CPU
-
-CF = 0
-
-
-QEMU
-
-CF = 1
-
-Additional information
-This bug is discovered by research conducted by KAIST SoftSec.
diff --git a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_bzhi b/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_bzhi
deleted file mode 100644
index b86da08c..00000000
--- a/classification/semantic_issues/gitlab_semantic_bzhi
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,38 +0,0 @@
-x86 BZHI semantic bug
-Description of problem
-The result of instruction BZHI is different from the CPU. The value of destination register and SF of EFLAGS are different.
-
-Steps to reproduce
-
-Compile this code
-
-
-void main() {
-    asm("mov rax, 0xb1aa9da2fe33fe3");
-    asm("mov rbx, 0x80000000ffffffff");
-    asm("mov rcx, 0xf3fce8829b99a5c6");
-    asm("bzhi rax, rbx, rcx");
-}
-
-
-
-Execute and compare the result with the CPU.
-
-CPU
-
-RAX = 0x0x80000000ffffffff
-SF = 1
-
-
-QEMU
-
-RAX = 0xffffffff
-SF = 0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Additional information
-This bug is discovered by research conducted by KAIST SoftSec.