1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
|
<think>
Okay, so I'm trying to figure out how to classify this bug report for QEMU. The user provided a detailed description where they encountered an assertion failure when executing a specific RISC-V instruction, `vfncvt.rtz.x.f.w`.
First, let's break down what happened. They wrote a C program that uses the RISC-V vector instructions. When compiling and running this program using QEMU with certain CPU features enabled, it crashes with an assertion error at `target/riscv/translate.c:211`, specifically complaining about `ctx->insn_start != NULL`.
The problem started appearing after a specific commit in QEMU's history, which suggests that the bug might be related to changes made in that commit. The program they provided involves vector operations—loading doubles into a vector register, converting them using `vfncvt_rtz_x_f_w_i32mf2`, and then storing the result.
Now, considering the categories given: instruction, syscall, runtime. I need to determine which one this bug falls under.
The assertion failure is happening in the translation process of QEMU when handling an instruction. The error message points to `decode_save_opc` function, where it expects `ctx->insn_start` to be non-null. This suggests that during the decoding of the `vfncvt.rtz.x.f.w` instruction, something went wrong with how the instruction is being handled by QEMU's translation layer.
Since this is directly related to the processing of a specific RISC-V vector instruction (`vfncvt.rtz.x.f.w`), it seems like an issue with how QEMU handles or translates that particular instruction. Therefore, the bug report is about a faulty instruction leading to an assertion failure in the emulator.
So, putting it all together, this bug should be classified under "instruction" because it's related to handling a specific instruction causing QEMU to crash.
</think>
instruction
|