diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/hypervisor/616')
| -rw-r--r-- | results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/hypervisor/616 | 25 |
1 files changed, 25 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/hypervisor/616 b/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/hypervisor/616 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c3231059a --- /dev/null +++ b/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:14b/reasoning/hypervisor/616 @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +<think> +Okay, so I need to classify this bug report for QEMU into one of the given categories. Let me read through the problem carefully. + +The issue is with an overflow condition code being determined incorrectly on s390x architecture when running under QEMU 6.1.0 in Linux user-mode. The test program uses __builtin_add_overflow, which returns whether adding two integers causes an overflow. + +In the provided C code, they're testing both int and long long variables with their minimum values (-2147483648 for int and -9223372036854775808L for long long). The expected output is that there's no overflow (no_overflow = 0) because adding two negative numbers shouldn't cause an overflow in the case of int. However, when run under QEMU, it outputs no_overflow = 1, indicating an overflow. + +The user suspects that either GCC is generating incorrect code or QEMU isn't handling the condition codes properly. They looked at the generated assembly and noticed that GCC uses the 'o' (overflow/ones) condition code. The problem might be in how QEMU simulates this condition code during addition operations, especially for signed integers. + +Looking at the possible categories: +- Mistranslation: Incorrect mapping from source to target IR. Not sure yet. +- Assembly lowering: Incorrect assembly generated by GCC? Or is it QEMU's interpretation? +- Device/peripherals/kernel/network/etc.: These don't seem relevant here. +- The issue seems related to how condition codes are handled in the CPU, so maybe a bug in QEMU's simulation of s390x instructions. + +The user suggests that if QEMU doesn't correctly set the overflow condition code during addition, it would cause this bug. They also attached a patch, which implies the problem is within QEMU's handling of the condition codes for s390x. + +So, considering all this, the issue lies in how QEMU emulates the CPU's behavior regarding overflow conditions, specifically related to integer additions on s390x architecture. This points towards a problem in the hypervisor (QEMU) correctly simulating the hardware's behavior. +</think> + +The bug is related to how QEMU handles the condition codes for addition operations on s390x, particularly with overflow detection. + +**category:** + +hypervisor \ No newline at end of file |