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

[WIP][Model] Add support for multiple audio chunks/audio URLs #7826

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

petersalas
Copy link
Contributor

This adds:

  • Support for NestedTensors of arbitrary depth to represent multimodal inputs -- model implementations that support multiple multimodal inputs can return lists from their input mapper to include a dimension that represents the number of inputs in the prompt.
  • Support for multiple audio inputs per prompt in UltravoxModel
  • Support for multiple "audio_url"/"image_url" items in the OpenAI API server (up to the limits provided at initialization)

This depends on #7230 (for changes to repeat_and_pad_placeholder_tokens) which in turn is blocked on #7783.

I intend to split this into three PRs (NestedTensors, Ultravox, API server) but I'd love to get an assessment from @DarkLight1337 and @ywang96 on the overall approach.

BEFORE SUBMITTING, PLEASE READ THE CHECKLIST BELOW AND FILL IN THE DESCRIPTION ABOVE


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:

  • We adhere to Google Python style guide and Google C++ style guide.
  • Pass all linter checks. Please use format.sh to format your code.
  • The code need to be well-documented to ensure future contributors can easily understand the code.
  • Include sufficient tests to ensure the project to stay correct and robust. This includes both unit tests and integration tests.
  • Please add documentation to 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:

  • After the PR is submitted, the PR will be assigned to a reviewer. Every reviewer will pick up the PRs based on their expertise and availability.
  • After the PR is assigned, the reviewer will provide status update every 2-3 days. If the PR is not reviewed within 7 days, please feel free to ping the reviewer or the vLLM team.
  • After the review, the reviewer will put an 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.
  • Please respond to all comments within a reasonable time frame. If a comment isn't clear or you disagree with a suggestion, feel free to ask for clarification or discuss the suggestion.

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!

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 consists a small and essential subset of CI tests to quickly catch errors. You can run other CI tests on top of default ones by unblocking the steps in your fast-check build on Buildkite UI.

Once the PR is approved and ready to go, please make sure to run full CI as it is required to merge (or just use auto-merge).

To run full CI, you can do one of these:

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

🚀

# items that already have them.
prompt_fragments = [text_prompt]
missing_placeholders: List[str] = []
for placeholder in placeholders:
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is pretty convoluted as it's a full generalization of the check that was there before -- happy to do something much simpler, I just wasn't sure which "placeholder is already present in the prompt" scenarios are important.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@petersalas petersalas Aug 23, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(Also it needs tests if it remains in its current form :))

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is fine, but definitely needs some examples to better make sense of it.

Copy link
Member

@DarkLight1337 DarkLight1337 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Left some initial comments!


tensors_ = cast(List[torch.Tensor], concatenated)
return torch.stack(tensors_) if all(t.shape == tensors_[0].shape
for t in tensors_) else tensors_
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for implementing my suggestion from the RFC! Would be great to add some tests for this.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you for laying out the plan!

@@ -70,7 +72,7 @@ def vllm_to_hf_output(vllm_output: Tuple[List[int], str,
def run_test(
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's separate the test for single-input (without list) and multi-input (with list)

Comment on lines +111 to +133
mm_data: MultiModalDataDict = {}

# Merge all the multi-modal items
for single_mm_data in (await asyncio.gather(*futures)):
for mm_key, mm_item in single_mm_data.items():
existing_item = mm_data.get(mm_key)
if not existing_item:
# Clone it if it's already a list so we can freely
# mutate it later.
item_to_insert = mm_item[:] if isinstance(
mm_item, list) else mm_item
mm_data[mm_key] = item_to_insert # type: ignore
else:
if isinstance(existing_item, list):
result_list = existing_item
else:
result_list = [existing_item]
mm_data[mm_key] = result_list # type: ignore

if isinstance(mm_item, list):
result_list.extend(mm_item)
else:
result_list.append(mm_item)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks quite complicated. Can we simplify the code here using a defaultdict? We allow Mapping[str, object] in MultiModalDataDict so this shouldn't cause any type errors.

# items that already have them.
prompt_fragments = [text_prompt]
missing_placeholders: List[str] = []
for placeholder in placeholders:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is fine, but definitely needs some examples to better make sense of it.

@petersalas
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing in favor of #7902 and #7923 (and another PR to follow for Ultravox).

@petersalas petersalas closed this Aug 27, 2024
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