### What this PR does / why we need it?
This PR enables separate attention backend configuration for target and
draft models in speculative decoding, decoupling the previously bound
attention backend settings between the two models.
It solves the compatibility issue where some draft models do not support
the attention backend used by the target model, and allows users to
select the optimal attention backend for each model individually to
maximize inference performance. The change is fully backward compatible.
---------
Signed-off-by: SidaoY <1024863041@qq.com>
## What this PR does / why we need it?
Implements [RFC
#6954](https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/issues/6954):
NPUWorker Profiler profile_prefix full adaptation for API parity with
upstream vLLM.
### Changes
- **Lazy profiler init**: Defer profiler creation until first
`profile(is_start=True)` call
- **profile_prefix param**: Add `profile_prefix` to `profile()`; compute
`trace_name` from prefix + `get_worker_rank_suffix()`
- **Refactor `_init_profiler` → `_create_profiler(trace_name)`**: Pass
`worker_name` to `tensorboard_trace_handler` for unique trace files per
worker
- Unique trace files per worker; no collision in multi-worker setups
### Testing
- Unit tests updated/added in `tests/ut/worker/test_worker_v1.py`
- `pytest tests/ut/worker/test_worker_v1.py::TestNPUWorker` passed
## Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
Yes. Trace file naming may differ (more descriptive with worker rank
suffix). `profile(is_start=True, profile_prefix="warmup")` now
supported.
## How was this patch tested?
- Unit tests:`pytest tests/ut/worker/test_worker_v1.py::TestNPUWorker`
- Manual: vLLM serve with profiler config, start/stop profile, verified
trace files
- vLLM version: v0.16.0
- vLLM main:
15d76f74e2
---------
Signed-off-by: realliujiaxu <realliujiaxu@163.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
- Keeps enable_cpu_binding default on, but skips binding on non‑ARM CPUs
inside bind_cpus, with a clear log.
- Uses a table-driven binding policy: A3 uses NUMA‑balanced binding;
other device types use NUMA‑affinity binding.
- Updates docs to reflect the exact behavior and adds/updates unit tests
for the new logic.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
- Yes. CPU binding is now enabled by default via additional_config, and
documented in the user guide.
- CPU binding behavior differs by device type (A3 vs. others).
### How was this patch tested?
Added/updated unit tests:
test_cpu_binding.py
1. test_binding_mode_table covers A2 vs A3 binding mode mapping.
2. test_build_cpu_pools_fallback_to_numa_balanced covers fallback when
affinity info is missing.
3. TestBindingSwitch.test_is_arm_cpu covers ARM/x86/unknown arch
detection.
4. test_bind_cpus_skip_non_arm covers non‑ARM skip path in bind_cpus.
test_worker_v1.py
1. Updated mocks for enable_cpu_binding default True to align with new
config default.
- vLLM version: v0.14.1
- vLLM main: d7de043
---------
Signed-off-by: chenchuw886 <chenchuw@huawei.com>
Co-authored-by: chenchuw886 <chenchuw@huawei.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
This PR fixes an accuracy issue that occurs when using Prefill/Decode
Context Parallelism (PCP/DCP) in conjunction with speculative decoding
(MTP). The issue is caused by an irregular attention mask shape when
both features are enabled.
The fix involves flattening the `block_table` for speculative decoding
requests under PCP/DCP to ensure a regular attention mask. This PR also
introduces a `use_cp` property for cleaner code and updates dummy runs
to handle this scenario correctly.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No. This is a bug fix that improves accuracy and should not have
user-facing API changes.
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.15.0
- vLLM main: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/v0.15.0
---------
Signed-off-by: Wang Kunpeng <1289706727@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Since the PR (https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/pull/32118) has
modified the criteria for judging Prefill and Decode requests in vLLM,
PCPManager needs to synchronize with this standard. As PCPManager
involves multiple calculations of PD request counts, this PR attempts to
consolidate the related logic and update the PD request count once per
batch.
### How was this patch tested?
```bash
pytest tests/e2e/multicard/4-cards/long_sequence/test_mtp.py
```
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
11b6af5280
Signed-off-by: QiuChunshuo <qiuchunshuo@huawei.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
The structure of the `excute_model` and `_dymmy_run` methods in
NPUModelRunner differs greatly from that in GPUModelRunner.
Achieve alignment with GPUModelRunner:
Split the `_prepare_inputs` method into `_prepare_inputs`,
`_determine_batch_execution_and_padding`, `_build_attention_metadata`,
and `_preprocess`.
Modify `_generate_process_reqs_hidden_states` to `_model_forward`.
Align the implementation of the `postprocess` phase
**Related-RFC**: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/issues/5449
**Co-authored-by**: @zhenwenqi2024
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
no
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
d68209402d
---------
Signed-off-by: Wang Kunpeng <1289706727@qq.com>
Signed-off-by: gcanlin <canlinguosdu@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: zhenwenqi2024 <zhenwenqi_2022@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: gcanlin <canlinguosdu@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: zhenwenqi2024 <zhenwenqi_2022@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Drop vLLM 0.13.0 support, upgrade to 0.14.0
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
d68209402d
---------
Signed-off-by: hfadzxy <starmoon_zhang@163.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Fixed the issue where the PCP and MTP services could not be started due
to asynchronous scheduling.
After the pcp, mtp, and asynchronous scheduling functions are enabled,
the service is suspended because of a shape mismatch after a curl
request is sent. This PR resolves this issue.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
2c24bc6996
---------
Signed-off-by: weiguihua2 <weiguihua2@huawei.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Migrate the torch profiler configuration from deprecated environment
variables (`VLLM_TORCH_PROFILER_DIR`, `VLLM_TORCH_PROFILER_WITH_STACK`,
`VLLM_TORCH_PROFILER_WITH_PROFILE_MEMORY`) to the explicit
`ProfilerConfig` object, aligning with vLLM's configuration best
practices.
The profiler environment variable approach is deprecated in vLLM and
will be removed in v0.14.0 or v1.0.0.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
yes, for deverlopers who want to fetch profiler, he should use `--profiler-config` instead of `VLLM_TORCH_PROFILER_DIR`
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
11b6af5280
Signed-off-by: Meihan-chen <jcccx.cmh@gmail.com>
## What this PR does / why we need it?
This PR fixes the `AttentionMaskBuilder` singleton initialization issue
introduced in PR #4779 and removes the unused `pcp_prefill_mask` field.
### Background
After PR #4779 made `AttentionMaskBuilder` a singleton with `@singleton`
decorator, the class constructor now requires a `device` parameter.
However, two initialization sites were still using the old parameterless
constructor, causing failures.
### Changes
1. **Fix singleton initialization**
- Fixed `AttentionMaskBuilder()` → `AttentionMaskBuilder(self.device)`
in `AscendMLAMetadataBuilder.__init__()`
- Fixed `AttentionMaskBuilder()` → `AttentionMaskBuilder(self.device)`
in `AscendAttentionMetadataBuilder.__init__()`
2. **Remove unused field**
- Removed `pcp_prefill_mask` field from
`AscendPrefillContextParallelMetadata` (never used in codebase)
- Updated related test assertions
### Related
- Issue #5463
- PR #4779 (Unify all mask generation methods)
- PR #5389 (Make AttentionMaskBuilder singleton)
## Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No. This is an internal refactoring.
## How was this patch tested?
- ✅ Local testing: No linter errors
- ✅ Unit tests for attention modules verified
- ⏳ CI pipeline
Signed-off-by: lico67373 <918688502@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: weijinqian0 <1184188277@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
1. add `COMPILATION_PASS_KEY` constant
2. clean up useless platform interface `empty_cache`, `synchronize`,
`mem_get_info`, `clear_npu_memory`
3. rename `CUSTOM_OP_REGISTERED` to `_CUSTOM_OP_REGISTERED`
4. remove uesless env `VLLM_ENABLE_CUDAGRAPH_GC`
NPUPlatform is the interface called by vLLM. Do not call it inner
vllm-ascend.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
This PR is just a cleanup. All CI should pass.
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
7157596103
Signed-off-by: wangxiyuan <wangxiyuan1007@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Revert PR 5253 to fix the smoking problem
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
Does not.
### How was this patch tested?
It was tested in the failure case.
Signed-off-by: Rifa <865071616@qq.com>
## Purpose
This PR add unit test for `compute_slot_mapping` function in
`block_table.py` with various `pcp_size` & `dcp_size` &
`cp_kv_cache_interleave_size`.
## Test Plan
```
pytest tests/ut/worker/test_block_table.py
```
## Test Result
```
==== 3 passed, 2 warnings in 0.20s ====
```
- vLLM version: v0.12.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: QiuChunshuo <qiuchunshuo@huawei.com>
Currently, the vllm pull request
(https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/pull/24252) is causing operator
fusion to fail. This issue was previously fixed by patching the backend.
The root cause has been identified, and the problem can be resolved with
this pull request.
- vLLM version: release/v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: wxsIcey <1790571317@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Since the _npu_ring_mla operator deteriorates in long-sequencescenarios,
the long sequence is split into shorter sequences for input to improve
performance.
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
5326c89803
---------
Signed-off-by: pichangping <1337510399@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Refactor pcp& dcp related code. we use pcp_manager class to Unifiy
Manage pcp & dcp . as we do this , many code can be deleted from
model_runner, and can avoid break pcp & dcp by other developments.
RFC：https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/issues/5449
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
NO
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: release/v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: zhenwenqi2024 <zhenwenqi_2022@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: zzzzwwjj <34335947+zzzzwwjj@users.noreply.github.com>
1. What this PR does / why we need it?
This PR supports the moe_gating_top_k operator, which enables
post-positioned renormalization (renorm) on the basis of softmax.
2. Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No user-facing changes are required.
3. How was this patch tested?
This patch was tested with the test_npu_moe_gating_top_k test case.
vLLM version: release/v0.13.0
vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: ZCG12345 <2097562023@qq.com>
Signed-off-by: zzzzwwjj <34335947+zzzzwwjj@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: zzzzwwjj <34335947+zzzzwwjj@users.noreply.github.com>
We'll release 0.13.0 soon. The main branch is freeze. Let's revert the
newest change and redo it once 0.13.0 is released
- vLLM version: release/v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
81786c8774
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Since the _npu_ring_mla operator deteriorates in long-sequencescenarios,
the long sequence is split into shorter sequences for input to improve
performance.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
no
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: release/v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: pichangping <1337510399@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: wangxiyuan <wangxiyuan1007@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
This PR aim to implement model runner v2 basic framework in vllm-ascend,
the e2e function is not guaranteed by this pr.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
use envs.VLLM_USE_V2_MODEL_RUNNER to decide if choose model_runenr_v2.
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.12.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: Ronald1995 <ronaldautomobile@163.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
add ut for model runner
- vLLM version: v0.12.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: LookAround <lixushi@huawei.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
refactor npu_modelrunner， we should be close to gpu_modelrunner
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
NO
- vLLM version: v0.12.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: zhenwenqi2024 <zhenwenqi_2022@qq.com>
Signed-off-by: zhenwenqi2024 <155598497+zhenwenqi2024@users.noreply.github.com>
mindie_turbo is out of data for long time. This PR remove the related register method.
- vLLM version: v0.12.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
Signed-off-by: wangxiyuan <wangxiyuan1007@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
To support pipeline parallel with PD disaggregation, this PR support PP
in mooncake connector and fix other bugs when enable pp with other
optimization params, including following changes:
- mooncake connector support pp in prefill, we do not support decode pp
currently
- fix bugs when enable both pp and flashcomm1
- optimize ascend-scheduler to support full batch in multiple pipeline
stages, original implementation would cause all pipeline stages
batch_size total summed to max_num_seq, which makes pipeline is not
full, this optimization can make all stages running with full batch_size
= max_num_seq, the same changes will contribute to vllm scheduler too.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
add `pp_size` in mooncake connector kv_connector_extra_config
```
"kv_connector_extra_config": {
"use_ascend_direct": true,
"prefill": {
"dp_size": 1,
"tp_size": 4,
"pp_size": 4
},
"decode": {
"dp_size": 16,
"tp_size": 1
}
}
```
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.12.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
---------
Signed-off-by: chenxiao <Jaychou1620@Gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kurumi5210 <Jaychou1620@Gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kurumi5210 <jaychou1620@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: 秋刀鱼 <jaychou1620@Gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: chenxiao <Jaychou1620@Gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: zss <zss@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: zss <3265779424@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
In reinforcement learning scenarios, the current inference applies a
transpose operation to the weights. For a cleaner architecture, the
weight transpose module was moved to wakeup.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.12.0
- vLLM main:
ad32e3e19c
Signed-off-by: lhp-deep <liuhaopeng1@huawei.com>
Co-authored-by: weijinqian0 <1184188277@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Currently, there are two paths to judge the chip type in code,
`get_ascend_soc_version` use `get_soc_version` api in torch_npu, and
`is_310p` `use _build_info.__soc_version__`, which generate when
install. We need to unify the two paths.
We need to unify these codes based on the following points:
1. We need to ensure consistency in chip type judgment between compiling
and running states;
2. In compiling state, we need chip type to complete op's compilation,
but in running state, we only need device
type(910B/910_93/310P/910_95/etc) to make code branch judgement;
3. In compiling state, torch_npu may not have been installed yet, so we
can't use torch_npu's api.
Based on the above points, we have made the following changes:
1. When user set env `SOC_VERSION`, use it; when not set, query
soc_version by `npu-smi`;
2. generate device_type based on soc_version when compiling, and write
`__device_type__` instead of `__soc_version__` in `_build_info.py`;
3. In running state, use `__device_type__` to judge code branch.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
When not set env `SOC_VERSION`, it will not be `ASCEND910B1` by default,
we will query soc_version by `npu-smi`. And env `SOC_VERSION` must be in
the list `soc_to_device` in `setup.py`.
- vLLM version: v0.11.0
- vLLM main:
2918c1b49c
Signed-off-by: zzzzwwjj <1183291235@qq.com>
The main purposes of this PR are as follows:
1. Remove the multicast-related code;
Reason:
1. In the scenario like a2 Dual-System Back-to-Back Networking，the
performance is worse than all_gather. Before the modification, in e2e
test, it was 3 tps; after the modification, it is 10 tps.
2. At the same time, we usually enable the SP feature，it is consistent
with the current logic.
3. The advantage of broadcast communication lies in the fact that it
does not suffer from uneven DP load and does not require the prefill ACL
graph to be enabled. But we support prefill Acl graph recently.
So we think there is no need to maintain the multicast as one choice in
moe communication.
Performance benefits are as follows:
When not enable_flashcomm1, TTFT remains relatively stable at around
43000ms, which is approximately 15000ms faster than before the
modification.
When enable_flashcomm1, there is no diffenence, TTFT remains relatively
stable at around 29000ms.
- vLLM version: v0.11.0
- vLLM main:
2918c1b49c
---------
Signed-off-by: weijinqian_v1 <weijinqian@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: weijinqian0 <1184188277@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: weijinqian_v1 <weijinqian@huawei.com>
There is a lot hack code for v0.11.0, which makes the code hard to
upgrade to newer vLLM version. Since v0.11.0 will release soon. Let's
drop v0.11.0 support first. Then we'll upgrade to v0.11.2 soon.
- vLLM version: v0.11.0
- vLLM main:
2918c1b49c
Signed-off-by: wangxiyuan <wangxiyuan1007@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Support the Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct quantization model and Fix the
NZ issue. Triton kernel doesn't support data format nz, thus we skip
converting weight to nz on layer `conv1d`
- vLLM version: v0.11.0
- vLLM main:
2918c1b49c
---------
Signed-off-by: IncSec <1790766300@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
enable sleepmode level2 e2e test and add the check logic to ensure the
nz is not enabled.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
no
### How was this patch tested?
use e2e tests
- vLLM version: v0.11.0
- vLLM main:
83f478bb19
Signed-off-by: wangx700 <wangxin700@huawei.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Enable the unit tests that #3612 skipped.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
### How was this patch tested?
Unit tests.
- vLLM main:
17c540a993
Signed-off-by: gcanlin <canlinguosdu@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
The `force_attention` parameter is designed for flash infer kernel
warmup, we don't actually need it on Ascend device (at least for
now).And it tends to make things more complicated. So we replace the
`force_attention` parameter with `aclgraph_runtime_mode` in the
attention metadata creation logic.
This change makes the control flow more explicit by directly using the
graph runtime mode to determine how to build attention metadata, rather
than relying on an intermediate boolean flag. This simplification
removes redundant logic and clarifies the conditions for building
attention metadata for full decode graph mode.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
None.
### How was this patch tested?
DP + `FULL_DECODE_ONLY` + online serving.
- vLLM version: v0.11.0rc3
- vLLM main: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/v0.11.0
---------
Signed-off-by: Yizhou Liu <liu_yizhou@outlook.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Make the Full Graph mode can run with MTP.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.11.0rc3
- vLLM main: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/v0.11.0
Signed-off-by: anon189Ty <Stari_Falcon@outlook.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Adapt deepseek-v3.2 to vllm 0.11.0, removing the useless patch.
The final goal is to remove all the patches and align the code arch to
vllm, thus we need to do the following work in next prs.
TODO:
- [x] remove patch on attention spec
- [ ] refactor the kvcache creation logic
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
N/A
### How was this patch tested?
1. CI passed with existing test.
2. Test pass with deepseek-v3.2-exp
- vLLM version: v0.11.0rc3
- vLLM main: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/v0.11.0
Signed-off-by: MengqingCao <cmq0113@163.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
When running DP in a non-equilibrium scenario, which means there is some
dp groups executing `dummy_run`, we need to make sure it running the
same mode as other dp, thus improving then performance in dp scenario
### How was this patch tested?
Tested by adding log in `_dummy_run`
- vLLM version: v0.10.2
- vLLM main:
https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm/commit/releases/v0.11.0
---------
Signed-off-by: MengqingCao <cmq0113@163.com>
…to avoid unintentional copy ops blocking across different NPU streams,
improving disagg TTIT/TTFT (#2788)"
### What this PR does / why we need it?
This reverts commit 6995a7bc5b. We'll add
it back once the issue is fixed.
related issue: https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/issues/3195
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.10.2
- vLLM main:
52d0cb8458
