From d0c85e36e4de67af628d54e9ab577cc3fad7796a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Christian Krinitsin Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 07:27:52 +0000 Subject: add deepseek and gemma results --- results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/302 | 13 +++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) create mode 100644 results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/302 (limited to 'results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/302') diff --git a/results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/302 b/results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/302 new file mode 100644 index 00000000..c3418959 --- /dev/null +++ b/results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/302 @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ + +Alright, I need to classify this bug report into one of the given categories. The bug is titled "[Fuzz] qemu-system-i386 virtio-mouse: Assertion in address_space_lduw_le_cached failed". + +First, looking at the components mentioned: "qemu-system-i386" indicates it's part of QEMU, and "virtio-mouse" refers to VirtIO input devices. The assertion failure is in "address_space_lduw_le_cached", which seems related to memory access or address translation. + +The possible categories include things like device, network, hypervisor, etc. Since VirtIO devices are typically emulated by the hypervisor layer in QEMU, this points towards a hypervisor issue. Also, the function name suggests it's handling memory addresses, which is part of how the hypervisor interacts with virtualized hardware. + +So, the most fitting category here is "hypervisor". + + +The bug report involves an assertion failure related to address space access during VirtIO mouse emulation in QEMU. Since this pertains to the interaction between the host and guest through the hypervisor layer, it falls under the hypervisor category. + +**Answer:** hypervisor \ No newline at end of file -- cgit 1.4.1