-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.8k
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
[Bugfix] Fix vLLM UsageInfo and logprobs None AssertionError with empty token_ids #9034
Conversation
When there is no new tokens generated, Sequence.get_output_token_ids_to_return should return empty list.
👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM project. 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 do one of these:
🚀 |
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.
Thanks @CatherineSue and thanks for adding the test!
@CatherineSue looks like the test is failing, the max context for the model used is 8k token, would that be sufficient to expose the issue? |
Oh I saw in the server fixture in test_chat.py we set --max-model-len to 8192. In our test, we used llama3.2-1b-instruct and llama3.2-3b-instruct, with --max-model-len=131072, and a prompt with 2000 tokens can expose it. Can we use llama3.2 model in CI? |
@CatherineSue I don't see why not, we already use other llama models elsewhere in the CI (would probably make sense to move most/all that usage to the 1B model now anyhow). |
@njhill sorry for the late updates. I was sick for the past two weeks and didn't get time to fix the ut.
Emm do we need to pass specific HF_TOKEN for the CI? |
@CatherineSue no problem, sorry to hear that and I hope you're feeling better. Actually I had just started to look at this myself, and have written a separate test that uses a smaller max_num_batched_tokens to force prompt chunking without needing a very long context. This also reproduces the issue. In the process of doing that I also found some related bugs. In any case I'm happy to push those updates to your branch so feel free to leave this and I'll do it soon (hopefully tonight). |
cfa698a
to
88bbb2d
Compare
88bbb2d
to
8f15b82
Compare
OK @CatherineSue I have pushed the additional test, as well as changes to omit redundant empty chunks being returned to the user in this case. Hopefully this is good to go now! |
…ty token_ids (vllm-project#9034) Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: charlifu <[email protected]>
…ty token_ids (vllm-project#9034) Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Vinay Damodaran <[email protected]>
…ty token_ids (vllm-project#9034) Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alvant <[email protected]>
…ty token_ids (vllm-project#9034) Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Amit Garg <[email protected]>
…ty token_ids (vllm-project#9034) Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: qishuai <[email protected]>
…ty token_ids (vllm-project#9034) Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Sumit Dubey <[email protected]>
…ty token_ids (vllm-project#9034) Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <[email protected]>
…ty token_ids (vllm-project#9034) Co-authored-by: Nick Hill <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Maxime Fournioux <[email protected]>
When there is no new tokens generated, Sequence.get_output_token_ids_to_return should return empty list.
FILL IN THE PR DESCRIPTION HERE
FIX #8988 (link existing issues this PR will resolve)
BEFORE SUBMITTING, PLEASE READ THE CHECKLIST BELOW AND FILL IN THE DESCRIPTION ABOVE
PR Checklist (Click to Expand)
Thank you for your contribution to vLLM! Before submitting the pull request, please ensure the PR meets the following criteria. This helps vLLM maintain the code quality and improve the efficiency of the review process.
PR Title and Classification
Only specific types of PRs will be reviewed. The PR title is prefixed appropriately to indicate the type of change. Please use one of the following:
[Bugfix]
for bug fixes.[CI/Build]
for build or continuous integration improvements.[Doc]
for documentation fixes and improvements.[Model]
for adding a new model or improving an existing model. Model name should appear in the title.[Frontend]
For changes on the vLLM frontend (e.g., OpenAI API server,LLM
class, etc.)[Kernel]
for changes affecting CUDA kernels or other compute kernels.[Core]
for changes in the core vLLM logic (e.g.,LLMEngine
,AsyncLLMEngine
,Scheduler
, etc.)[Hardware][Vendor]
for hardware-specific changes. Vendor name should appear in the prefix (e.g.,[Hardware][AMD]
).[Misc]
for PRs that do not fit the above categories. Please use this sparingly.Note: If the PR spans more than one category, please include all relevant prefixes.
Code Quality
The PR need to meet the following code quality standards:
format.sh
to format your code.docs/source/
if the PR modifies the user-facing behaviors of vLLM. It helps vLLM user understand and utilize the new features or changes.Adding or changing kernels
Each custom kernel needs a schema and one or more implementations to be registered with PyTorch.
Tensors
require meta-functions. Meta-functions should be implemented and registered in python so that dynamic dims can be handled automatically. See above documents for a description of meta-functions.torch.libary.opcheck()
to test the function registration and meta-function for any registered ops. Seetests/kernels
for examples.Notes for Large Changes
Please keep the changes as concise as possible. For major architectural changes (>500 LOC excluding kernel/data/config/test), we would expect a GitHub issue (RFC) discussing the technical design and justification. Otherwise, we will tag it with
rfc-required
and might not go through the PR.What to Expect for the Reviews
The goal of the vLLM team is to be a transparent reviewing machine. We would like to make the review process transparent and efficient and make sure no contributor feel confused or frustrated. However, the vLLM team is small, so we need to prioritize some PRs over others. Here is what you can expect from the review process:
action-required
label on the PR if there are changes required. The contributor should address the comments and ping the reviewer to re-review the PR.Thank You
Finally, thank you for taking the time to read these guidelines and for your interest in contributing to vLLM. Your contributions make vLLM a great tool for everyone!