1 files changed, 15 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:32b/reasoning/instruction/2419 b/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:32b/reasoning/instruction/2419
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..30273c302
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/deepseek-r1:32b/reasoning/instruction/2419
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+<think>
+Okay, so I need to classify this bug report into one of three categories: instruction, syscall, or runtime. Let me try to understand what's going on here.
+
+The problem is about the ldapr_stlr_i instructions in QEMU. The user mentions that these instructions model load acquire and store release immediate operations. They found a bug where the imm field isn't correctly handling signed offsets. Instead of treating it as a signed 9-bit value (s9), it's being treated as an unsigned 9-bit value (9). This causes issues when the imm value is negative, leading to incorrect calculations in QEMU.
+
+Looking at the steps to reproduce: running on ARM target and generating such instructions leads to wrong immediate calculations if the imm is negative. The user fixed it by changing the imm field from 9 to s9, which made a difference in how it's handled in the generated code—specifically using sextend32 instead of extend32.
+
+Now, classifying this: The issue is related to how QEMU handles specific instructions and their immediate values. It's not about system calls (syscall) or runtime errors like memory management issues (runtime). Instead, it's a problem with the instruction decoding and handling—how the imm field is interpreted as signed versus unsigned.
+
+So, I think this falls under the "instruction" category because it directly relates to how instructions are processed by QEMU.
+</think>
+
+The bug report discusses an issue with specific ARM64 instructions (ldapr_stlr_i) where the immediate value isn't correctly handled as a signed 9-bit value. This affects instruction processing, not system calls or runtime errors.
+
+**Answer:** instruction
\ No newline at end of file