.coderabbit.yaml

# SPDX-FileCopyrightText: Copyright (c) 2025-2026 NVIDIA CORPORATION & AFFILIATES. All rights reserved.
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
#
# Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
# you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
# You may obtain a copy of the License at
#
# http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
#
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
# limitations under the License.

# yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json
# Docs: https://docs.coderabbit.ai/getting-started/configure-coderabbit/
# In a PR, comment "@coderabbitai configuration" to view the resolved config.

language: "en-US"

reviews:
  profile: chill

  auto_title_placeholder: "@coderabbitai title"
  auto_title_instructions: >-
    Format: "[<category>] <title>". Category must be one of: fix, feat, doc,
    infra, style, refactor, perf, test, chore, revert. Enclose the category in
    square brackets. Keep the title concise (60 characters or fewer).
    Example: "[feat] Add logit_bias support".

  commit_status: false
  high_level_summary_instructions: |
    Provide two concise sections:

    ## Dev Engineer Review
    Summarize material findings or risks in source code, configuration, and
    test-list changes. Focus on correctness, API consistency, regressions,
    performance, and unintended scope changes.

    ## QA Engineer Review
    If no files under `tests/` changed, write exactly: "No test changes."

    Otherwise summarize:
    - Test files and test-list files added, modified, or removed.
    - Test functions, test IDs, selectors, or waivers added, modified, or
      removed when discoverable.
    - Important behavior, error paths, regressions, or components covered.
    - Whether changed integration tests are listed in the appropriate
      `test-db/` CI or `qa/` manual-QA lists when applicable.
    - Coverage verdict: `sufficient`, `insufficient`, or `needs follow-up`.

    For test-list-only changes, summarize the affected list files and entries
    directly. Do not require test-function changes or CBTS touchmap evidence.

    ## Per-File QA Perspective
    For each changed file, include a concise QA perspective:
    - For test-code files (tests/** excluding tests/integration/test_lists/**): note what
      the test covers and whether it is listed in tests/integration/test_lists/test-db/ (CI)
      or tests/integration/test_lists/qa/ (manual QA).
    - For source files: note any observable behavior changes a QA engineer should verify
      (new code paths, changed APIs, altered defaults, removed functionality).
    - For configuration files (e.g. .coderabbit.yaml, *.yml, *.yaml, *.json, *.toml):
      note any review or workflow behavior changes introduced by the config update.
    Keep each entry to 1-2 sentences; omit if no QA-relevant impact.
  collapse_walkthrough: false
  assess_linked_issues: true
  related_issues: true
  related_prs: true
  suggested_labels: true
  suggested_reviewers: true
  poem: false
  review_status: false

  auto_review:
    auto_incremental_review: true
    drafts: false
    base_branches: ["main", "release/.+"]

  path_filters:
    # Vendored/adapted FlashInfer kernels; excluded from review.
    - "!tensorrt_llm/_torch/attention/backends/prims_ts/**"

  path_instructions:
    # Production-code coverage review. This is required because tests/** rules
    # do not run when a PR changes source code without changing a test file.
    - path: "tensorrt_llm/**"
      instructions: |
        Perform the normal production code review with the same rigor as if
        these test-coverage instructions were absent.

        Test coverage review is additive. It must not replace, downgrade, or
        suppress findings about correctness, API compatibility, error handling,
        performance, backward compatibility, resource safety, CUDA/GPU
        behavior, concurrency, distributed behavior, or security.

        Review TensorRT-LLM production-code changes for meaningful test
        coverage in addition to normal code review.

        For each new or materially changed observable behavior, determine
        whether this PR adds, updates, or clearly identifies an existing test
        that meaningfully exercises the change. Consider tests under tests/**,
        including unit, integration, distributed, and regression tests.

        Leave an INLINE review comment on the smallest relevant changed
        production-code hunk when a material test coverage gap exists. Do not
        put an actionable missing-test finding only in the summary.

        Flag material coverage gaps such as:
        - A new or changed validation rule, error path, fallback, retry,
          configuration option, API contract, serialization behavior, runtime
          behavior, scheduler behavior, quantization behavior, distributed
          behavior, or observable output with no meaningful test.
        - A bug fix without a practical regression test that would have failed
          before the fix.
        - Authentication, authorization, input validation, error propagation,
          or failure recovery changes covered only by a happy-path test.
        - A removed or weakened test that leaves changed behavior without an
          equivalent replacement or documented reason.

        For each inline finding:
        - Name the exact changed behavior that lacks coverage.
        - State the concrete failure or regression the missing test could miss.
        - Propose the smallest practical test scenario and likely test location.
        - Do not make vague comments such as "add more tests".

        Do not require tests for comments, documentation-only edits,
        formatting-only changes, generated artifacts, type-only changes,
        behavior-preserving renames/refactors, or dead-code removal when no
        observable behavior changes.

        Do not claim a coverage gap if existing tests clearly and meaningfully
        cover the changed behavior.

    # Test-code correctness review and test execution/list coverage review.
    - path: "tests/**"
      instructions: |
        Act as a QA engineer reviewing TensorRT-LLM test changes for test
        correctness, reliability, and meaningful behavior coverage.

        Always produce a concise test coverage summary, even if no issues are
        found. State:
        - Test files added, modified, or removed.
        - Test functions, parameterized test IDs, or cases added, modified, or
          removed when discoverable.
        - Behaviors, components, failure paths, or regressions covered.
        - Relevant test-list/execution coverage and any material gaps.
        - Coverage verdict: sufficient, insufficient, or needs follow-up.

        Leave INLINE review comments anchored to the smallest relevant changed
        line or hunk for every distinct, actionable test correctness or test
        coverage issue. Do not put actionable findings only in the summary.

        Add inline comments for:
        - Missing, incorrect, overly weak, or non-observable assertions.
        - Incorrect expected values or assertions that contradict the intended
          API contract, test name, docstring, parameterization, or comments.
        - Tests that can silently pass, including swallowed exceptions, bare
          `except: pass`, assertions in unreachable code, assertions scoped
          incorrectly, always-true conditions, disabled/skipped/xfail tests
          without adequate justification, or mocks that bypass the behavior
          purportedly under test.
        - Faulty setup/teardown, resource leaks, fixture contamination,
          un-restored environment variables, uncleaned temporary files,
          subprocesses, global/shared state, CUDA state, or distributed process
          groups.
        - Flaky patterns, including unseeded randomness, timing dependence,
          order dependence, arbitrary sleeps, polling without a bounded timeout,
          race-prone asynchronous execution, external-state dependence, or
          non-deterministic output/order assertions.
        - A test name, docstring, parameterization, comment, or test-list entry
          that does not match what the test actually validates.
        - A removed or weakened test that reduces meaningful coverage without an
          equivalent replacement or documented reason.
        - A modified test-list entry that does not correspond to a discoverable
          real test ID, parameterized test ID, or documented selector.

        For each inline finding:
        - Post one inline comment per distinct issue; do not combine unrelated
          issues into one comment.
        - Explain why the test can pass despite a defect or fail
          non-deterministically.
        - Identify the concrete behavior, failure mode, or regression that is
          untested or incorrectly tested.
        - Suggest the smallest practical correction or additional test case.
        - Do not force comments when no actionable issue exists.

        Test coverage principles:
        - Prefer behavior and contract coverage over raw line coverage.
        - Check normal behavior, meaningful boundaries, invalid inputs, error
          paths, recovery paths, and regression scenarios when relevant.
        - Prefer assertions on observable results and side effects over only
          verifying mock call counts or internal implementation details.
        - Do not require redundant tests for comments, formatting-only edits,
          generated files, behavior-preserving renames, or trivial refactors.
        - Do not claim a coverage gap unless the changed behavior is reasonably
          identifiable from the PR context.

        TensorRT-LLM-specific test checks:
        - Require explicit, precise capability gating for CUDA version, GPU
          architecture, GPU count, memory requirements, NCCL/distributed
          availability, external model availability, and optional dependencies.
          Do not accept broad skips that can mask unrelated failures.
        - For multi-GPU or distributed tests, check rank-safe setup/teardown,
          bounded synchronization and timeouts, and assertions on the intended
          rank(s).
        - For numerical tests, require tolerances appropriate to dtype,
          quantization mode, backend, and expected numerical variance. Flag
          tolerances broad enough to hide material regressions.
        - Distinguish correctness tests from benchmarks. Do not require fixed
          latency or throughput assertions unless the repository explicitly
          defines stable hardware-specific performance baselines.
        - Prefer deterministic local fixtures over network downloads, mutable
          external model artifacts, or shared machine state where practical.

        Special handling for test-list-only changes:
        If the PR touches ONLY files under tests/integration/test_lists/ and
        contains no test-code changes:
        - Report all modified test-list files, including waives.txt, and every
          entry, selector, test ID, or waiver added and removed.
        - Do NOT require changed test functions for this path.
        - Review list changes directly for valid test IDs/selectors, correct
          formatting, duplicate entries, intended tier/scope, and appropriate
          bug references.
        - CBTS touchmap coverage evidence is not applicable: test-list-only
          changes are handled directly by Tier 1 path/diff rules, while the
          touchmap is used for residual source-code changes.
        - Do NOT use verdict "needs follow-up" solely because
          cbts_touchmap.sqlite or a CBTS coverage report is unavailable. Use
          "sufficient" or "insufficient" based on the correctness and intended
          scope of the list changes.
        - For waiver additions, flag only when repository-required metadata is
          absent, such as a clear rationale, owner/bug reference, or expiration
          condition.

        For changes including test-code files outside
        tests/integration/test_lists/, the summary must include:
        1. Which test functions, parameterized test IDs, or cases were added,
           modified, or removed.
        2. Whether each changed integration test is listed in the appropriate
           test-list files under tests/integration/test_lists/: test-db/ for
           auto-run CI and qa/ for manually-triggered QA, when listing is
           expected by repository convention.
        3. A coverage verdict: sufficient, insufficient, or needs follow-up.
        4. Concrete test-list file names whenever suggesting additions.

    # Manual QA lists are independently maintained from CI test-db lists.
    - path: "tests/integration/test_lists/qa/**"
      instructions: |
        Files here are manually-triggered QA performance/regression lists
        maintained by the QA team. They are not derived from and do not need to
        mirror the auto-run CI test-db under
        tests/integration/test_lists/test-db/.

        Do NOT suggest cross-syncing entries between qa/ and test-db/. Coverage
        in one does not imply coverage in the other; their membership and scope
        are decided independently.

        Review entries for valid selectors/test IDs, formatting, duplicates,
        intended QA scope, and repository-required bug references/metadata.

    # Auto-run CI lists are independently maintained from manual QA lists.
    - path: "tests/integration/test_lists/test-db/**"
      instructions: |
        Files here drive the auto-run CI test-db, including per-GPU l0_*.yml
        tiers. Adding or removing an entry changes what CI runs either in every
        PR (pre-merge) or three times per day (post-merge).

        Do NOT suggest cross-syncing entries with the manual QA lists under
        tests/integration/test_lists/qa/. Coverage in QA and CI is decided
        independently.

        Review entries for valid selectors/test IDs, formatting, duplicates,
        correct target tier/GPU scope, and repository-required bug references
        or waiver metadata.

    # Test list data files are intentionally headerless by repository convention.
    - path: "tests/integration/test_lists/**"
      instructions: |
        Files here, including waives.txt and *.txt/*.yml list files, are
        plain-text test-list data files rather than source code. By repository
        convention, they carry no NVIDIA copyright/license header.

        Do NOT require or suggest adding a copyright, SPDX, or license header
        to files under this directory.

knowledge_base:
  code_guidelines:
    enabled: true
    filePatterns: ["**/CODING_GUIDELINES.md"]