This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 11, 2024. It is now read-only.
forked from vllm-project/vllm
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Previously FP8 static scaling works if the scales are overestimating the maxima of all activation tensors during computation. However this will not always be the case even if the scales were calibrated very carefully. For example, with the activations in my checkpoint https://huggingface.co/pcmoritz/Mixtral-8x7B-v0.1-fp8-act-scale (which was calibrated on https://huggingface.co/datasets/HuggingFaceH4/ultrachat_200k), I'm getting the following mostly random performance on MMLU: | Groups |Version|Filter|n-shot|Metric|Value | |Stderr| |------------------|-------|------|-----:|------|-----:|---|-----:| |mmlu |N/A |none | 0|acc |0.2295|± |0.0035| | - humanities |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.2421|± |0.0062| | - other |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.2398|± |0.0076| | - social_sciences|N/A |none | 5|acc |0.2171|± |0.0074| | - stem |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.2125|± |0.0073| With the fix in this PR where the scaled activations are clamped between [-std::numeric_limits<c10::Float8_e4m3fn>::max(), std::numeric_limits<c10::Float8_e4m3fn>::max()] to make sure there are no NaNs, the performance is | Groups |Version|Filter|n-shot|Metric|Value | |Stderr| |------------------|-------|------|-----:|------|-----:|---|-----:| |mmlu |N/A |none | 0|acc |0.7008|± |0.0036| | - humanities |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.6453|± |0.0065| | - other |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.7692|± |0.0072| | - social_sciences|N/A |none | 5|acc |0.8083|± |0.0070| | - stem |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.6115|± |0.0083| This is not perfect yet but is getting very close to the FP16 / dynamic activation scale performance.
Co-authored-by: Lei Wen <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Cade Daniel <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Cody Yu <[email protected]>
…-project#4660) [Core][Distributed] support both cpu and device tensor in broadcast tensor dict (vllm-project#4660)
Previously FP8 static scaling works if the scales are overestimating the maxima of all activation tensors during computation. However this will not always be the case even if the scales were calibrated very carefully. For example, with the activations in my checkpoint https://huggingface.co/pcmoritz/Mixtral-8x7B-v0.1-fp8-act-scale (which was calibrated on https://huggingface.co/datasets/HuggingFaceH4/ultrachat_200k), I'm getting the following mostly random performance on MMLU: | Groups |Version|Filter|n-shot|Metric|Value | |Stderr| |------------------|-------|------|-----:|------|-----:|---|-----:| |mmlu |N/A |none | 0|acc |0.2295|± |0.0035| | - humanities |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.2421|± |0.0062| | - other |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.2398|± |0.0076| | - social_sciences|N/A |none | 5|acc |0.2171|± |0.0074| | - stem |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.2125|± |0.0073| With the fix in this PR where the scaled activations are clamped between [-std::numeric_limits<c10::Float8_e4m3fn>::max(), std::numeric_limits<c10::Float8_e4m3fn>::max()] to make sure there are no NaNs, the performance is | Groups |Version|Filter|n-shot|Metric|Value | |Stderr| |------------------|-------|------|-----:|------|-----:|---|-----:| |mmlu |N/A |none | 0|acc |0.7008|± |0.0036| | - humanities |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.6453|± |0.0065| | - other |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.7692|± |0.0072| | - social_sciences|N/A |none | 5|acc |0.8083|± |0.0070| | - stem |N/A |none | 5|acc |0.6115|± |0.0083| This is not perfect yet but is getting very close to the FP16 / dynamic activation scale performance.
…project#4592) Co-authored-by: Cade Daniel <[email protected]>
…project#4400) Co-authored-by: Michael Goin <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: miloice <[email protected]>
…e had 4 nvcc threads and N max_jobs for N VCPUs. All notes in vllm upstream suggest that this will overload the cpu. Seeing build times > 1hr at current, so trying this
andy-neuma
approved these changes
May 31, 2024
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.
cool.
looks good, but can you update "remote push" workflow for python 3.10? it is still set to use "tmp", around line 55
|
derekk-nm
approved these changes
May 31, 2024
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.
I could only look at a fraction of the file changes. there are a few known issues, but I'm approving.
avoid failure in automation. not sure why this is failing. passes locally including when i setup the env in the exact same way
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Upstream sync 2024 05 25 (#249)
SUMMARY:
Merge commits from vllm-project@c7f2cf2 to vllm-project@f68470e
Note that vllm-project@c7f2cf2 is NOT included in this merge.
PR Checklist (Click to Expand)
Thank you for your contribution to vLLM! Before submitting the pull request, please ensure the PR meets the following criteria. This helps vLLM maintain the code quality and improve the efficiency of the review process.
PR Title and Classification
Only specific types of PRs will be reviewed. The PR title is prefixed appropriately to indicate the type of change. Please use one of the following:
[Bugfix]
for bug fixes.[CI/Build]
for build or continuous integration improvements.[Doc]
for documentation fixes and improvements.[Model]
for adding a new model or improving an existing model. Model name should appear in the title.[Frontend]
For changes on the vLLM frontend (e.g., OpenAI API server,LLM
class, etc.)[Kernel]
for changes affecting CUDA kernels or other compute kernels.[Core]
for changes in the core vLLM logic (e.g.,LLMEngine
,AsyncLLMEngine
,Scheduler
, etc.)[Hardware][Vendor]
for hardware-specific changes. Vendor name should appear in the prefix (e.g.,[Hardware][AMD]
).[Misc]
for PRs that do not fit the above categories. Please use this sparingly.Note: If the PR spans more than one category, please include all relevant prefixes.
Code Quality
The PR need to meet the following code quality standards:
format.sh
to format your code.docs/source/
if the PR modifies the user-facing behaviors of vLLM. It helps vLLM user understand and utilize the new features or changes.Notes for Large Changes
Please keep the changes as concise as possible. For major architectural changes (>500 LOC excluding kernel/data/config/test), we would expect a GitHub issue (RFC) discussing the technical design and justification. Otherwise, we will tag it with
rfc-required
and might not go through the PR.What to Expect for the Reviews
The goal of the vLLM team is to be a transparent reviewing machine. We would like to make the review process transparent and efficient and make sure no contributor feel confused or frustrated. However, the vLLM team is small, so we need to prioritize some PRs over others. Here is what you can expect from the review process:
action-required
label on the PR if there are changes required. The contributor should address the comments and ping the reviewer to re-review the PR.Thank You
Finally, thank you for taking the time to read these guidelines and for your interest in contributing to vLLM. Your contributions make vLLM a great tool for everyone!