### What this PR does / why we need it?
Resolve the issue where, in the case of unequal TP (Tensor Parallelism),
the TP size is larger than the number of model attention kvcache heads,
causing the KV cache to generate duplicates, which leads to transmission
errors in the original code.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No
### How was this patch tested?
By ci
- vLLM version: v0.11.0rc3
- vLLM main: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/v0.11.0
---------
Signed-off-by: nwpu-zxr <zhouxuerong2@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: wangxiaoteng <wangxiaoteng@huawei.com>
Co-authored-by: nwpu-zxr <zhouxuerong2@huawei.com>
### Motivation
Currently dynamically experts balancing would stop-the-world.
Asynchronously expert load balancing would be better without flowing
problems:
Host-bound latency:
There are many cpu operations during EPLB such as
eplb-algorithm、creating p2p ops、and log2phy expert converting would
spend long cpu time, as ~1s.
Communication latency: The transfer time would cost much in the
situation without nvlink. As the weight of an expert maybe transfer to
multiple new positions, thus N times send/recv for one expert, with
result long latency. We had tested that batch_isend_irecv cost more
100ms for 16 experts weight transmission in A2 server of ascend.
SwiftBalancer would not stop-the-world anymore, in out test on NPU 1~2ms
cost for each layer while benefit 5ms-8ms decode latency with ep_size =
64.
The following updates have been made:
1、expert distribution recording with lower cost.
2、async cpu computing for eplb algo and other python operator.
3、new eplb algo with less expert rebalancing while almost the same
effect.
### Proposed Change
We will gradually migrate the EPLB logic to the VLLM community and
implement a generalized design. Relevant RFC:
https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/issues/22246
The overall workflow involves:
<img width="801" height="302"
alt="474430541-23b06f58-23bc-44a3-a1be-00f268aeb15c"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1d73a459-1b23-4b0a-812a-bf0a75debfed"
/>
1. Record experts distribution during forward. We using expert_token_num
after disptach instead of topk_ids, thus we got much smaller tensor
shape to reduce cost of hbm recording and add-operator.
2. Do all-gather for experts distribution. Using all-gather instead of
all-reduce as less traffic volume.
3. Wake up eplb worker process with experts distribution when
num_iterations comes. Run eplb algorithm in eplb worker.
4. Generate p2p send/recv ops and other operator such as log2phy would
cost long cpu time.
5. Lanch ibatch_send_recv in async_stream before forward.
6. After forward, wait for the ibatch_send_recv finish, then do uapte
expert map and expert weights.
### Co-author
Co-authored-by: raindaywhu raindaywhu@raindaywhu@ 163.con
Co-authored-by: njuyuan yuanjl19@smail.nju.edu.cn
Co-authored-by: qmkakaxi wjh1594260677@qq.com
Co-authored-by: Skywalker-EP 173723846@qq.com
- vLLM version: v0.10.2
- vLLM main:
567939953b
---------
Signed-off-by: offline0806 <z00858301@china.huawei.com>
Co-authored-by: offline0806 <z00858301@china.huawei.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
1. Move ops/comm_utils to ops/moe/comm_utils
2. Move distributed/tensor_parallel/gather_from_sequence_parallel_region
to ops/moe/comm_utils
3. Delete distributed/tensor_parallel
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
no
### How was this patch tested?
e2e & ut
- vLLM version: main
- vLLM main:
a1213fae5f
---------
Signed-off-by: wuweiqiang24 <1005334931@qq.com>
Signed-off-by: wuweiqiang24 <wuweiqiang11@huawei.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
This PR introduces Oproj matrix tensor model parallel to achieve
decreasing of memory consumption. It only support graph mode in pure DP
scenario.
In deepseek r1 w8a8 PD disagregated Decode instance, using pure DP, with
oproj_tensor_parallel_size = 8, we have 1 ms TPOT increasing, saved 5.8
GB NPU memory per RANK. We got best performance when
oproj_tensor_parallel_size=4 without TPOT increasing.
performance data:
<img width="1442" height="442" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/83270fc5-868a-4387-b0a9-fac29b4a376d"
/>
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
This PR introduces one new config in `additional_config`.
| Name | Effect | Required | Type | Constraints |
| :---------------------------- |
:--------------------------------------- | :------- | :--- |
:----------------- |
| oproj_tensor_parallel_size | Split the o_proj matrix along the row
dimension (head num * head dim) into oproj_tensor_parallel_size pieces.
| No | int | default value is None, once this value is set, the feature
will be enabled, head num * head dim must be divisible by this value. |
example
`--additional_config={"oproj_tensor_parallel_size": 8}`
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.10.1.1
- vLLM main:
eddaafc1c7
---------
Signed-off-by: zzhx1 <zzh_201018@outlook.com>
Co-authored-by: zzh <zzh_201018@outlook.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
This PR introduces LMhead tensor model parallel to achieve decreasing of
memory consumption, and TPOT performance improvement. It support both
eager mode and graph mode.
In deepseek r1 w8a8 PD disagregated Decode instance, using pure DP, with
lmhead_tensor_parallel_size = 8, we have 1 ms TPOT optimization, saved
1.48 GB NPU memory per RANK.
performance data:
<img width="1444" height="438" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3c5ef0d3-a7c7-46fd-9797-4de728eb0cb0"
/>
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
This PR introduces one new config in `additional_config`.
| Name | Effect | Required | Type | Constraints |
| :---------------------------- |
:--------------------------------------- | :------- | :--- |
:----------------- |
| lmhead_tensor_parallel_size | Split the lm_head matrix along the
column dimension (vocab_size) into lmhead_tensor_parallel_size pieces |
No | int | default value is None, once this value is set, the feature
will be enabled, vocab_size must be divisible by this value. |
example
`--additional_config={"lmhead_tensor_parallel_size": 8}`
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.10.1.1
- vLLM main:
de533ab2a1
---------
Signed-off-by: zzhx1 <zzh_201018@outlook.com>
Co-authored-by: zhangzihang <zzh_201018@outlook.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
This method replaces the previous all-gather approach for small numbers
of tokens.
The key changes include:
- A new `AscendFusedMoE` layer that handles token splitting, local
computation, and final aggregation via all-gather.
- Logic in the model runner to dynamically select between the new MC2
method and the existing all-gather method based on the number of input
tokens.
- Sharding the MoE communication mask across tensor-parallel ranks.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
None.
### How was this patch tested?
Test case fixed.
- vLLM version: v0.10.1.1
- vLLM main:
b00e69f8ca
---------
Signed-off-by: Yizhou Liu <liu_yizhou@outlook.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Add ut for test_communicator.py
- vLLM version: v0.10.0
- vLLM main:
e5ebeeba53
Signed-off-by: yangqinghao-cmss <yangqinghao_yewu@cmss.chinamobile.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Add some ut for files in folder /distributed
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No
- vLLM version: v0.9.2
- vLLM main:
107111a859
Signed-off-by: lwq <liwenquan5@huawei.com>
Co-authored-by: lwq <liwenquan5@huawei.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Use base test to avoid patch everwhere.
Followup here: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/pull/1566
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No
### How was this patch tested?
ut ci passed
- vLLM version: v0.9.2
- vLLM main:
8d0a01a5f2
Signed-off-by: Yikun Jiang <yikunkero@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Remove ETP/EP maintained in branch main. We drop this as there is no
relevant scenarios to use ETP now, and we may subsequently advocate
implementing expert tensor parallelism in vLLM to support scenarios
where the expert is needed to be sliced
This is a part of #1422 backport.
Fixes https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/issues/1396https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/issues/1154
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
We'll not maintain etp/ep in vllm-ascend anymore, and use the tp/ep in
vllm instead.
### How was this patch tested?
CI passed with new added and existing test.
- vLLM version: v0.9.2
- vLLM main:
fe8a2c544a
Signed-off-by: MengqingCao <cmq0113@163.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Use Base test and cleanup all manaul patch code
- Cleanup EPLB config to avoid tmp test file
- Use BaseTest with global cache
- Add license
- Add a doc to setup unit test in local env
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No
### How was this patch tested?
CI passed
Signed-off-by: Yikun Jiang <yikunkero@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
test kv data transfer contains connect,pipe,buffer
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
N/A
### How was this patch tested?
CI passed with new added test.
---------
Signed-off-by: lixudong <lixudong@cmss.chinamobile.com>
Signed-off-by: MengqingCao <cmq0113@163.com>
Co-authored-by: lixudong <lixudong@cmss.chinamobile.com>
Co-authored-by: MengqingCao <cmq0113@163.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Add ut for parallel_state.py
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
N/A
### How was this patch tested?
python -m unittest test_parallel_state.py
---------
Signed-off-by: wangyanhui-cmss <wangyanhui_yewu@cmss.chinamobile.com>
