This reverts commit 8966a99710.
It breaks the test
`tests/e2e/singlecard/spec_decode/test_mtp_eagle_correctness.py::test_deepseek_mtp_correctness[True-FULL_DECODE_ONLY-2-wemaster/deepseek_mtp_main_random_bf16]`
- vLLM version: v0.14.0
- vLLM main:
d68209402d
### What this PR does / why we need it?
**Refactor: Unify full-graph parameter update logic**
This PR consolidates the scattered full-graph parameter update logic
into a unified approach, improving code architecture and eliminating
duplication.
**Key improvements:**
1. **Unified interface**
- Create `update_full_graph_params` as the single entry point for all
full-graph updates
- Replace multiple scattered update calls with one unified function
- Remove ~50 lines of duplicated if-else logic across
`model_runner_v1.py` and `eagle_proposer.py`
2. **Better architecture**
- Move update logic to respective Backend classes
(`AscendAttentionBackend`, `AscendMLABackend`)
- Each Backend manages its own parameter update logic internally
- Simplify caller code to just dispatch to the appropriate Backend
3. **Cleaner parameter handling**
- Remove unnecessary `pcp_size` and `dcp_size` parameter passing
- Get parallel configuration directly from distributed groups
- Consistent with how other parts of the codebase obtain these values
**Why we need it:**
- **Maintainability**: Future changes only need to be made in one place
per Backend
- **Code quality**: Follows DRY principle and Single Responsibility
Principle
- **Readability**: Cleaner, more intuitive code structure
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
**No.** This is a pure refactoring with no functional changes - same
behavior, cleaner code.
### How was this patch tested?
- All existing unit tests pass with updated mocks
- No new tests needed (pure refactoring, no behavior changes)
- CI validates correctness
---
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
Signed-off-by: lico67373 <918688502@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: drslark <slarksblood@qq.com>
Co-authored-by: weijinqian0 <1184188277@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?
This PR refactors `get_kv_cache_spec` method to delegate AttentionSpec
creation to each attention module's own `get_kv_cache_spec()` method,
aligning with the vllm source code structure.
**Changes:**
- Simplify `get_kv_cache_spec` in `model_runner_v1.py` and
`cpu_offload_connector.py`
- Remove manual `AttentionType` checks for `Attention` modules
- Delegate spec creation to each attention module's `get_kv_cache_spec`
method directly
- Let `MambaBase` layers use their own `get_kv_cache_spec` method
- Keep `use_sparse` hack for `MLAAttention` (DeepSeek DSA mode) as
Ascend-specific handling
This change follows RFC #5463 item 12: move AttentionSpec to Attention
module.
- Fixes#5463 (item 12)
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
No. This is an internal refactoring that simplifies code structure
without changing any external behavior.
### How was this patch tested?
- Syntax validation passed via `python -m py_compile`
- CI tests will verify the changes work correctly with existing test
cases
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
2f4e6548ef
Signed-off-by: lico67373 <918688502@qq.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
As issue #5948 reported，when using cpu_offload_connector with TP=1, the
server will hang on starting, we found several bugs here to fix.
1. some crash error encountered because of code changed with vllm
version updating, some of them can be fixed as #5948, and this PR fixed
all of them.
2. hang problem described in #5948, the direct reason is that in
cpu_offload_connector, RPC client using the same client id in scheduler
and worker when tensor_parrallel_size is 1, this PR force the client id
to be different, then it is fixed.
- Why we didn't find this hang problem before?
Because we using --distributed-executor-backend mp or
tensor_parrallel_size > 1 in our test, in our old test case, the
scheduler and workers are different procceses, then client ids build by
`worker-{os.getpid()}` are not the same. But when using
tensor_parrallel_size=1, vllm will use uniproc as
distributed-executor-backend by default, the scheduler and worker will
by in the same proccess, then client ids are the same and hang.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
2c24bc6996
Signed-off-by: lidenghui <lidenghui1110@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Based on the RFC:https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/issues/5604
This PR is a refactoring of vllm_ascend/distributed.
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
NA
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
11b6af5280
Signed-off-by: lty <linhebiwen@gmail.com>
### What this PR does / why we need it?
Based on the RFC:https://github.com/vllm-project/vllm-ascend/issues/5604
This PR is a refactoring of vllm_ascend/distributed, moving all
kv_transfer realtaed codes into a dedicated folder, which has already
been done in vLLM
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
NA
### How was this patch tested?
- vLLM version: v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
2f4e6548ef
---------
Signed-off-by: lty <linhebiwen@gmail.com>
