1 files changed, 17 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/337 b/results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/337
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..b8d6d7e17
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/deepseek-2/reasoning/hypervisor/337
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+<think>
+Okay, so I'm trying to figure out how to classify this bug report: "QEMU emulator version 6.0.50 Failure with nested FreeBSD bhyve". The possible categories are a list including things like mistranslation, assembly lowering, device, graphic, etc.
+
+First, I need to understand what the bug is about. QEMU is an emulator and virtualization manager, so it can run different operating systems in virtual machines. The user mentioned "nested FreeBSD bhyve." Bhyve is a hypervisor for FreeBSD that allows running virtual machines. Nested here probably means they're trying to run another hypervisor inside a FreeBSD VM managed by QEMU.
+
+So the issue is that when using QEMU version 6.0.50, there's a failure when trying to set up a nested environment with FreeBSD bhyve. Now, I need to map this to one of the given categories.
+
+Looking at the options: device, graphic, socket, network, KVM, etc. Let me think about which category fits best.
+
+The problem is related to virtualization within QEMU. Since it's about running a hypervisor (bhyve) inside a QEMU VM, this might be related to nested virtualization or how QEMU handles hypervisors as guests. The failure could be due to incorrect handling of the hypervisor's requirements by QEMU.
+
+KVM is another virtualization technology, but here it's about bhyve in FreeBSD. So maybe 'hypervisor' is the category because it involves running a hypervisor within QEMU's environment.
+
+Alternatively, 'other' could be considered if none of the specific categories fit, but since hypervisors are involved and that's a possible category, I think 'hypervisor' is more accurate.
+</think>
+
+hypervisor
\ No newline at end of file