-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.8k
[Mis] remove duplicate engine status checks #19647
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
Conversation
👋 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 🚀 |
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 @googs1025, 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 focuses on cleaning up the core_client
by eliminating redundant checks for the engine's operational status. The primary change is streamlining the request abortion logic by performing the engine status check earlier in the process.
Highlights
- Redundant Check Removal: I've removed a duplicate
self.ensure_alive()
call from the_send_input
method, as this check was redundant in this context. - Early Engine Status Check: In
abort_requests_async
, I've added an early check forself.resources.engine_dead
to quickly return if the engine is already known to be dead, avoiding unnecessary processing. - Redundant Conditional Removal: Following the early check addition, I've removed the redundant
if not self.resources.engine_dead:
conditional block from the internal_abort_requests
method.
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 configureGemini 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
The pull request refactors the engine liveness checks related to aborting requests in the asynchronous client. The check is moved to the public abort_requests_async
method, which is a good improvement for efficiency. The removal of a check in the internal _abort_requests
method is correct as the check is now handled by its caller. However, a redundant check removal was identified in the _send_input
method.
fda84b9
to
9ccbef3
Compare
Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com>
9ccbef3
to
2960fcb
Compare
@DarkLight1337 /PTAL 😄 |
@@ -794,7 +794,6 @@ def _send_input(self, | |||
request_type: EngineCoreRequestType, | |||
request: Any, | |||
engine: Optional[CoreEngine] = None) -> Awaitable[Any]: | |||
self.ensure_alive() |
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.
we just check self.ensure_alive()
in 811 line
@@ -1059,7 +1058,7 @@ async def process_engine_outputs(self: "DPAsyncMPClient", | |||
self.reqs_in_flight.pop(req_id, None) | |||
|
|||
async def abort_requests_async(self, request_ids: list[str]) -> None: | |||
if not request_ids: | |||
if not request_ids or self.resources.engine_dead: |
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.
Quick return here, I understand that it is better to avoid the amount of calculation 🤔
cc @njhill |
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 @googs1025
Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: minpeter <kali2005611@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Yang Wang <elainewy@meta.com>
Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: googs1025 <googs1025@gmail.com>
Essential Elements of an Effective PR Description Checklist
The purpose of the PR, such as "Fix some issue (link existing issues this PR will resolve)".
The test plan, such as providing test command.
The test results, such as pasting the results comparison before and after, or e2e results
(Optional) The necessary documentation update, such as updating
supported_models.md
andexamples
for a new model.remove duplicate engine status checks
check the self.resources.engine_dead status in advance
Purpose
Test Plan
Test Result
(Optional) Documentation Update