[MLIR] Fix invalid escape sequences

[e-kwsm]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Thank you for submitting a Pull Request (PR) to the LLVM Project!

This PR will be automatically labeled and the relevant teams will be
notified.

If you wish to, you can add reviewers by using the "Reviewers" section on this page.

If this is not working for you, it is probably because you do not have write
permissions for the repository. In which case you can instead tag reviewers by
name in a comment by using @ followed by their GitHub username.

If you have received no comments on your PR for a week, you can request a review
by "ping"ing the PR by adding a comment “Ping”. The common courtesy "ping" rate
is once a week. Please remember that you are asking for valuable time from other developers.

If you have further questions, they may be answered by the LLVM GitHub User Guide.

You can also ask questions in a comment on this PR, on the LLVM Discord or on the forums.

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-mlir

Author: Eisuke Kawashima (e-kwsm)

Changes

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/94036.diff

1 Files Affected:

• (modified) mlir/utils/spirv/gen_spirv_dialect.py (+5-5)

diff --git a/mlir/utils/spirv/gen_spirv_dialect.py b/mlir/utils/spirv/gen_spirv_dialect.py
index 426bfca1b4f88..6418c933bfff3 100755
--- a/mlir/utils/spirv/gen_spirv_dialect.py
+++ b/mlir/utils/spirv/gen_spirv_dialect.py
@@ -536,7 +536,7 @@ def gen_instr_coverage_report(path, instructions):
 
     content = content.split(AUTOGEN_OPCODE_SECTION_MARKER)
 
-    existing_opcodes = [k[11:] for k in re.findall("def SPIRV_OC_\w+", content[1])]
+    existing_opcodes = [k[11:] for k in re.findall(r"def SPIRV_OC_\w+", content[1])]
     existing_instructions = list(
         filter(lambda inst: (inst["opname"] in existing_opcodes), instructions)
     )
@@ -594,7 +594,7 @@ def update_td_opcodes(path, instructions, filter_list):
     # Extend opcode list with existing list
     prefix = "def SPIRV_OC_"
     existing_opcodes = [
-        k[len(prefix) :] for k in re.findall(prefix + "\w+", content[1])
+        k[len(prefix) :] for k in re.findall(prefix + r"\w+", content[1])
     ]
     filter_list.extend(existing_opcodes)
     filter_list = list(set(filter_list))
@@ -637,7 +637,7 @@ def update_td_enum_attrs(path, operand_kinds, filter_list):
     assert len(content) == 3
 
     # Extend filter list with existing enum definitions
-    existing_kinds = [k[8:-4] for k in re.findall("def SPIRV_\w+Attr", content[1])]
+    existing_kinds = [k[8:-4] for k in re.findall(r"def SPIRV_\w+Attr", content[1])]
     filter_list.extend(existing_kinds)
 
     capability_mapping = get_capability_mapping(operand_kinds)
@@ -959,12 +959,12 @@ def extract_td_op_info(op_def):
       - A dict containing potential manually specified sections
     """
     # Get opname
-    opname = [o[8:-2] for o in re.findall("def SPIRV_\w+Op", op_def)]
+    opname = [o[8:-2] for o in re.findall(r"def SPIRV_\w+Op", op_def)]
     assert len(opname) == 1, "more than one ops in the same section!"
     opname = opname[0]
 
     # Get instruction category
-    inst_category = [o[4:] for o in re.findall("SPIRV_\w+Op", op_def.split(":", 1)[1])]
+    inst_category = [o[4:] for o in re.findall(r"SPIRV_\w+Op", op_def.split(":", 1)[1])]
     assert len(inst_category) <= 1, "more than one ops in the same section!"
     inst_category = inst_category[0] if len(inst_category) == 1 else "Op"
 

[joker-eph]

What is the symptom for this? If the code was incorrect, can a test shows how the change is actually fixing anything?

[e-kwsm]

I am not sure what happens for such invalid escape sequences are passed, but python3.12 gives something like

SyntaxWarning: invalid escape sequence '\w'

[nikic]

This needs a rebase.