Skip to content

Conversation

@Livinfly
Copy link
Contributor

@Livinfly Livinfly commented Nov 20, 2025

I discovered a potential issue regarding the missing logic of the block_table in #28718.
In the PCP rank, it should also store only one copy, so the parameter passed from MultiGroupBlockTable to BlockTable should likely be multiplied by cp_world_size. The original code seems to be missing the PCP_world_size factor.
Could you please verify this, or am I mistaken?

@pisceskkk

Purpose

fix block_table

Test Plan

NA

Test Result

NA

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.

Signed-off-by: Livinfly <[email protected]>
@mergify mergify bot added the v1 label Nov 20, 2025
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 correctly fixes a bug in the block_table by factoring in pcp_world_size for block size calculations, which is essential for correct behavior with Prefill Context Parallelism. The logic change is sound. I have included one review comment suggesting a refactoring to address code duplication for fetching distributed world sizes. This will improve maintainability and prevent potential inconsistencies in the future.

@pisceskkk
Copy link
Contributor

pisceskkk commented Nov 21, 2025

Yes, we did overlook the logic modifications for MultiGroupBlockTable. Thank you very much for fixing this.
CC @LucasWilkinson

Copy link
Contributor

@pisceskkk pisceskkk 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 for fix!

@LucasWilkinson LucasWilkinson enabled auto-merge (squash) November 21, 2025 06:03
@github-actions github-actions bot added the ready ONLY add when PR is ready to merge/full CI is needed label Nov 21, 2025
@LucasWilkinson LucasWilkinson merged commit 5c8f2ad into vllm-project:main Nov 22, 2025
47 of 48 checks passed
ywang96 pushed a commit to ywang96/vllm that referenced this pull request Nov 23, 2025
lpapavassiliou pushed a commit to lpapavassiliou/vllm that referenced this pull request Nov 24, 2025
RunkaiTao pushed a commit to RunkaiTao/vllm that referenced this pull request Nov 24, 2025
bringlein pushed a commit to bringlein/vllm that referenced this pull request Nov 26, 2025
devpatelio pushed a commit to SumanthRH/vllm that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2025
kitaekatt pushed a commit to kitaekatt/vllm that referenced this pull request Dec 1, 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