1 files changed, 9 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/1918026 b/results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/1918026
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..fda738582
--- /dev/null
+++ b/results/classifier/qwen3:32b/reasoning/instruction/1918026
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+<think>
+Okay, let's see. The user is reporting a bug in QEMU's RISC-V simulation related to AMOs (Atomic Memory Operations). Specifically, they mention that 32-bit AMOs like amomaxu.w and amomax.w are not working correctly. The test cases show that when using these instructions, the expected values aren't being stored or retrieved properly. For example, after calling test with a value of -11, the value at the memory location changes from -7 to -11, which shouldn't happen according to their expectations.
+
+The user suspects that the issue is in the code where trans_amo<op>_w is using tcg_gen_atomic_fetch_<op>_tl instead of tcg_gen_atomic_fetch_<op>_i32. The functions in question are part of QEMU's TCG (Tiny Code Generator) for handling atomic operations. The suffixes _tl and _i32 likely refer to different data sizes. Since the AMO is 32-bit, using the wrong function (maybe one meant for 64-bit operations) could lead to incorrect handling of the data size, causing the atomic operations to read or write the wrong number of bytes. This would explain why the tests are failing—because the atomic operation isn't properly treating the data as 32-bit integers.
+
+In QEMU, AMOs need to correctly handle the size of the data. If the code for 32-bit AMOs is using a function intended for target_long (which might be 64-bit on RISC-V64), that would cause the 32-bit operations to be misaligned or improperly sized. This would result in incorrect values being stored or loaded. The problem isn't with the syscall or runtime environment, but with the specific instruction's implementation. So the category is "instruction".
+</think>
+
+instruction
\ No newline at end of file