Skip to content

Conversation

@lhtin
Copy link
Contributor

@lhtin lhtin commented Sep 29, 2025

Use seq_lens_cpu instead of seq_lens to reduce GPU->CPU sync.

Purpose

Reduce unnecessary GPU->CPU sync, since it will affect the perf of Async Scheduling+MTP.
Clipboard_Screenshot_1759149439

Test Plan

Test Result


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 and examples for a new model.
  • (Optional) Release notes update. If your change is user facing, please update the release notes draft in the Google Doc.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request introduces a performance optimization to reduce GPU-to-CPU synchronization during speculative decoding. The change replaces a call to .max() on a GPU tensor (seq_lens) with its CPU counterpart (seq_lens_cpu) within a conditional check. This avoids a blocking operation, which is particularly beneficial for asynchronous scheduling. The change is correct and aligns with the stated goal of improving performance. I have no further comments.

@lhtin
Copy link
Contributor Author

lhtin commented Sep 29, 2025

Which introduce by this pr(#24662), @AlonKejzman can you help review this too? thanks.

Copy link
Collaborator

@benchislett benchislett left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks!

@benchislett benchislett added the ready ONLY add when PR is ready to merge/full CI is needed label Sep 29, 2025
@DarkLight1337 DarkLight1337 merged commit e184c9c into vllm-project:main Sep 30, 2025
42 checks passed
pdasigi pushed a commit to pdasigi/vllm that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2025
yewentao256 pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2025
tomeras91 pushed a commit to tomeras91/vllm that referenced this pull request Oct 6, 2025
xuebwang-amd pushed a commit to xuebwang-amd/vllm that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2025
lywa1998 pushed a commit to lywa1998/vllm that referenced this pull request Oct 20, 2025
alhridoy pushed a commit to alhridoy/vllm that referenced this pull request Oct 24, 2025
xuebwang-amd pushed a commit to xuebwang-amd/vllm that referenced this pull request Oct 24, 2025
rtourgeman pushed a commit to rtourgeman/vllm that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2025
devpatelio pushed a commit to SumanthRH/vllm that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ready ONLY add when PR is ready to merge/full CI is needed v1

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants