Skip to content
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

[Kernel] Cleanup act_order code from the MarlinMoE kernels #8659

Closed

Conversation

ElizaWszola
Copy link
Contributor

@ElizaWszola ElizaWszola commented Sep 20, 2024

Remove act_order related code from the MarlinMoE kernel due to it being currently unused. Also assert that is_k_full is always true in these kernels (this is currently true for all codepaths).

Copy link

👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM project.
Just a reminder: PRs would not trigger full CI run by default. Instead, it would only run fastcheck CI which starts running only a small and essential subset of CI tests to quickly catch errors. You can run other CI tests on top of those by going to your fastcheck build on Buildkite UI (linked in the PR checks section) and unblock them. If you do not have permission to unblock, ping simon-mo or khluu to add you in our Buildkite org.

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 do one of these:

  • Add ready label to the PR
  • Enable auto-merge.

🚀

Copy link
Contributor

@dsikka dsikka left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems like we support g_idx for for gptq marlin moe?

@ElizaWszola
Copy link
Contributor Author

Seems like we support g_idx for for gptq marlin moe?

@dsikka Yes, the original intent of this PR was to temporarily reduce it from MoE kernels because it's not well tested. I've wrote some extra tests for it that revealed that the implementation has a bug somewhere, so I'm planning to fix it and push to this branch. Maybe I'll close this PR and make another one with the fix to avoid confusion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants