summary refs log tree commit diff stats
path: root/results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/1606
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/1606')
-rw-r--r--results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/16069
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/1606 b/results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/1606
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..6f185d9d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/1606
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+<think>
+Okay, let's see. The user is reporting an issue with RISC-V's FENCE.I instruction not working as expected in QEMU. The problem is that after P0 modifies some code, P1 reads the new code but executes the old one even after a FENCE.I. The test shows that the execution doesn't see the updated code despite the fence.
+
+So, the question is to classify this bug into one of the categories: instruction, syscall, or runtime. 
+
+First, FENCE.I is an instruction, right? It's a RISC-V instruction used to ensure instruction cache coherence. The issue here is that the FENCE.I isn't functioning properly. The problem isn't about a system call or runtime environment but about the instruction itself not working as specified. The test is at the user level, but the FENCE.I is a hardware-level instruction. Since QEMU emulates the hardware, this would be an issue with how QEMU handles the FENCE.I instruction. So the bug is in the instruction's implementation within QEMU. Therefore, the category should be "instruction".
+</think>
+
+instruction
\ No newline at end of file