1 files changed, 29 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/peripherals/1686980 b/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/peripherals/1686980
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..e2bfac55
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/peripherals/1686980
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+<think>
+Okay, so I need to classify this bug report for QEMU into one of the given categories: mistranslation, assembly, other, device, graphic, socket, network, KVM, boot, vnc, debug, files, permissions, performance, kernel, peripherals, hypervisor. The user provided a detailed bug report where adding 16,384 virtio-scsi drives causes QEMU to run very slowly. They mentioned that the stack trace from perf shows functions like drive_get and blk_legacy_dinfo taking up most of the CPU time.
+
+First, I should understand what each category means. Mistranslation is about incorrect mapping from source to target architecture in user mode. That doesn't seem relevant here because the issue is performance-related, not a translation error.
+
+Assembly lowering (assembly) would relate to issues during the assembly code generation step. The problem here isn't specific to how code is being translated but rather the overall slowness when adding many drives, so that's probably not it either.
+
+The bug report mentions Virtio-SCSI drives, which are a type of storage device emulation in QEMU. The performance hit is significant when adding a large number of these devices. Looking at the stack trace, functions like drive_get and blk_next suggest issues within the block layer or device handling. 
+
+Considering the categories: network, socket, and graphic don't seem to apply here since the problem is with storage devices (SCSI). KVM relates to kernel-based virtualization, but this issue seems more about the hypervisor's handling of many devices rather than KVM itself.
+
+The 'peripherals' category would cover issues with devices attached to the VM. Since Virtio-SCSI is a peripheral device, and the problem arises when adding many such devices, it fits under peripherals. However, performance issues could also fall under the 'performance' category. 
+
+But since the bug specifically involves multiple drives causing slowness in handling device-related functions (drive_get), it's more about how QEMU manages these devices rather than general performance. So 'peripherals' seems appropriate.
+
+Alternatively, if the issue is about the hypervisor layer struggling to handle numerous devices efficiently, 'hypervisor' could be a contender. But since Virtio-SCSI is typically handled through device emulation and not directly by the hypervisor's core functions, 'peripherals' might still be better.
+
+Wait, another thought: performance issues often have their own category, which is 'performance'. The problem here is that adding many drives slows down the system, so it's a performance issue. Therefore, maybe 'performance' is the correct category.
+
+But the stack trace points to functions within device handling (drive_get), which suggests that the root cause is in how devices are managed. So perhaps it's more about peripherals than overall performance.
+
+I'm a bit torn between 'peripherals' and 'performance'. The issue affects performance, but the underlying cause is related to device management. Since the categories are somewhat overlapping, I should choose based on what the bug report emphasizes. It says QEMU runs slowly when adding many virtio-scsi drives, so it's about handling those devices efficiently.
+
+Therefore, I think 'peripherals' is the correct category because the problem is with managing multiple SCSI devices.
+</think>
+
+The bug report describes a performance issue when adding numerous Virtio-SCSI drives, which are handled by QEMU's device management. The stack trace points to functions related to device handling, suggesting the issue lies in how QEMU manages these devices rather than general system performance.
+
+**peripherals**
\ No newline at end of file