Update on Overleaf.

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/intro.tex b/intro.tex
index 2a48d4b..44d0b1c 100644
--- a/intro.tex
+++ b/intro.tex
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ This paper reports on our campaign to test HLS tools by fuzzing.
     
     \item We give these programs to three widely used HLS tools: Xilinx Vivado HLS~\cite{xilinx20_vivad_high_synth}, LegUp HLS~\cite{canis13_legup} and the Intel HLS Compiler, which is also known as i++~\cite{intel20_sdk_openc_applic}. When we find a program that causes an HLS tool to crash, or to generate hardware that produces a different result from GCC, we reduce it to a minimal example with the help of the \creduce{} tool~\cite{creduce}.
     
-    \item Our testing campaign revealed that all three tools could be made to crash while compiling or to generate wrong RTL. In total, we found \ref{XX} bugs across the three tools, all of which have been reported to the respective developers, and \ref{XX} of which have been confirmed at the time of writing.
+    \item Our testing campaign revealed that all three tools could be made to crash while compiling or to generate wrong RTL. In total, we found 6 bugs across the three tools.
     
     \item To investigate whether HLS tools are getting more or less reliable over time, we also tested three different versions of Vivado HLS (2018.3, 2019.1, and 2019.2).  We found that in general there about half as many failures in versions 2019.1 and 2019.2 compared to 2018.3.  However, there were also test-cases that only failed in versions 2019.1 and 2019.2, meaning bugs were probably introduced due to the addition of new features.
 \end{itemize}