Answering the multiple AI reviews (why are there 3 of them, all via Claude?):
1. Test naming > +/* 32-bit bitwise AND between a scalar range and immediate, triggering UB. */ > +static int > +test_alu32_and_k_ub(void) I agree with the AI that test names (and comments) are somewhat minimalist and would require reader to check the commit message to find out what's going on. The suggestion by AI to replace `_ui` with `_range` is not improving things much however, so only doing it to placate the AI in case of another iteration. As far as I know DPDK does not have a strict policy for cross-referencing bugs, fixes and tests, so in the interest of time and code brevity not putting a huge effort into it unless asked by actual humans. 2. Test coverage Not contesting that current test coverage of these instructions is rudimentary and needs to be expanded; 32-bit instructions as a whole need a lot of work. It is all out of scope of this patch however, the added tests are sufficient for reproducing the specific bug and confirming the fix. Not addressing the rest of AI comments, they are all non-issues IMO.
