-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11.1k
Draft: [P/D] Get P/D working w/ DP #18495
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
This reverts commit 637b92d.
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
|
👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM project. 💬 Join our developer Slack at https://slack.vllm.ai to discuss your PR in #pr-reviews, coordinate on features in #feat- channels, or join special interest groups in #sig- channels. Just a reminder: PRs would not trigger full CI run by default. Instead, it would only run Once the PR is approved and ready to go, your PR reviewer(s) can run CI to test the changes comprehensively before merging. To run CI, PR reviewers can either: Add 🚀 |
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Nick Hill <nhill@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Nick Hill <nhill@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Nick Hill <nhill@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Nick Hill <nhill@redhat.com>
|
This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be |
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <nhill@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Eaton <weaton@redhat.com>
|
Once #18559 is merged I will pluck the relevant remaining changes into a clean branch. |
| # NOTE(weaton): Hack to get rank uniqueness across TP + DP ranks. | ||
| # Used for NIXL side channel communication. | ||
| self.unique_rank = (get_dp_group().rank_in_group * | ||
| self.world_size) + self.rank | ||
| logger.debug( | ||
| "NIXL worker %s TP rank %s, DP local rank %s, unique rank %s", | ||
| self.engine_id, self.rank, | ||
| get_dp_group().local_rank, self.unique_rank) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of construction the unique rank, can we do self.world_rank = get_world_group().rank_in_group? This should be less hacky and right for PP as well
| ======= | ||
| return (engine_core_outputs, | ||
| scheduler_output.total_num_scheduled_tokens > 0) | ||
| >>>>>>> njhill/fix-dp-with-delayed-req |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some merge conflict markers to clean up here
| # The KVConnector API takes in a ForwardContext here because it might need it | ||
| # in certain cases, in the `NixlConnector` path we basically ignore it. A | ||
| # future note here is to consider changing this to Optional[ForwardContext]. | ||
| # This work could also better be moved elsewhere. | ||
| # | ||
| # NOTE(weaton): Passing None here because getting the forward context | ||
| # is a blocking operation in the DP case. | ||
| kv_connector.start_load_kv(None) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We've basically dodged this issue with the forward context changes in #18559, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yep, #18559 is tested to fix this when this change is reverted, so all good
Draft PR, testing with 1P1D where DP=2 for D
This is a stacked PR, it has merged in commits already present in: #18559