-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10k
Fix num_token_padding support for static per-tensor scaled_fp8_quant #20188
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
Fix num_token_padding support for static per-tensor scaled_fp8_quant #20188
Conversation
Signed-off-by: mgoin <mgoin64@gmail.com>
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.
Summary of Changes
Hello @mgoin, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request resolves a specific issue where num_token_padding
was inadvertently restricted for static per-tensor scaled FP8 quantization, leading to a test failure. My change re-enables the intended support for num_token_padding
in this context, ensuring the correct behavior of the quantization function.
Highlights
- Bug Fix: I've addressed a regression introduced by a previous PR (/pull/20076) that caused
test_scaled_fp8_quant
to fail whennum_token_padding
was used withstatic_scaled_fp8_quant
. - Quantization Logic Adjustment: The assertion in
vllm/_custom_ops.py
for thestatic_scaled_fp8_quant
path was relaxed. Previously, it incorrectly enforcednum_token_padding is None
in addition toscale.numel() == 1
. I've removed thenum_token_padding is None
check, allowingnum_token_padding
to be supported in this specific static per-tensor scaled FP8 quantization scenario.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command>
or @gemini-code-assist <command>
. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
Feature | Command | Description |
---|---|---|
Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/
folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
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.
Code Review
This PR resolves a regression where num_token_padding
was incorrectly disallowed for static per-tensor FP8 quantization. The change removes the unnecessary assertion, and I've suggested ensuring input contiguity for CUDA kernel compatibility.
👋 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 🚀 |
@@ -1274,8 +1274,7 @@ def scaled_fp8_quant( | |||
scale = torch.zeros(1, device=input.device, dtype=torch.float32) | |||
torch.ops._C.dynamic_scaled_fp8_quant(output, input, scale) | |||
else: | |||
# num_token_padding not implemented for this case | |||
assert (scale.numel() == 1 and num_token_padding is None) | |||
assert scale.numel() == 1 |
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.
this assertion depends on use_per_token_if_dynamic
. if use_per_token_if_dynamic
, scale has a shape (shape[0], 1)
.
tests/kernels/moe/test_cutlass_moe.py
on main is currently failing due to #20076 as well.
…llm-project#20188) Signed-off-by: mgoin <mgoin64@gmail.com>
…llm-project#20188) Signed-off-by: mgoin <mgoin64@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: avigny <47987522+avigny@users.noreply.github.com>
…llm-project#20188) Signed-off-by: mgoin <mgoin64@gmail.com>
Purpose
FIX #20192
After #20076 fixed the assert to always check for per-tensor scales in the static scaled_fp8_quant case, this test
tests/quantization/test_fp8.py::test_scaled_fp8_quant
started failinghttps://buildkite.com/vllm/ci/builds/22749#0197ad88-59ca-41d0-9692-2bb3f5c6dca3
It seems to me that there is no reason why padding wouldn't be supported in this static per-tensor quant case
Test Plan
Use the existing failing test at
vllm/tests/quantization/test_fp8.py
Lines 190 to 196 in aafabaa
Test Result