[bugfix][v1]fixed the missing prompt value in RequestOutputs

[calvin0327]

Since the PR #17214 was merged, a new issue has emerged, the prompt field of the RequestOutputs object is empty when returned form the request queue. this occurs because when generating the requestState object for each request, the prompt value returned by decoder_inputs.get("prompt") in function process_inputs is already empty.

Therefore, when creating the requestState object, we directly decode the prompt characters from the request's prompt_tokens_ids and store in the requestState object.

[github-actions]

👋 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 fastcheck CI which starts running only a small and essential subset of CI tests to quickly catch errors. You can run other CI tests on top of those by going to your fastcheck build on Buildkite UI (linked in the PR checks section) and unblock them. If you do not have permission to unblock, ping simon-mo or khluu to add you in our Buildkite org.

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 ready label to the PR or enable auto-merge.

🚀

[calvin0327]

@DarkLight1337 @njhill /cc

PTAL, thanks.

[calvin0327]

Test:
before:

after:

[njhill]

Thanks @calvin0327... to clarify, this is just for the case where only prompt token ids and not a prompt string is provided in the request?

[calvin0327]

Thanks @calvin0327... to clarify, this is just for the case where only prompt token ids and not a prompt string is provided in the request?

@njhill Thanks for review，Regardless of whether the user provides prompt token IDs or a prompt string, the prompt field in the RequestOutput returned by AsyncLLM or LLMEngine will be missing. This is because there is an issue with parsing the prompt field when generating the requestState, resulting in it being empty.

[njhill]

Thanks @calvin0327... to clarify, this is just for the case where only prompt token ids and not a prompt string is provided in the request?

@njhill Thanks for review，Regardless of whether the user provides prompt token IDs or a prompt string, the prompt field in the RequestOutput returned by AsyncLLM or LLMEngine will be missing. This is because there is an issue with parsing the prompt field when generating the requestState, resulting in it being empty.

@calvin0327 I don't see how #17214 could have affected this though?

I don't think we want to reconstruct the prompt via detokenization if it was passed in the request. We should just make sure that the input processor obtains the original prompt properly (e.g. by fixing the parsing if needed).

[calvin0327]

@njhill Yes, I agree with you that the best approach would be to parse the prompt string within this function, However, after examining the function, I couldn't find any logic that converts the prompt token ids into a prompt string, Do you have any better ideas?

[mergify]

This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be
merged. Please rebase the PR, @calvin0327.

https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/syncing-a-fork

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any activity within 90 days. It will be automatically closed if no further activity occurs within 30 days. Leave a comment if you feel this pull request should remain open. Thank you!

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically closed due to inactivity. Please feel free to reopen if you intend to continue working on it. Thank you!