Skip to content

Add Qwen3.5 FP8 GB300 disaggregated multinode SGLang benchmarks via Dynamo / 新增 Qwen3.5 FP8 GB300 分离式多节点 SGLang(Dynamo)基准测试 - #2137

Merged
adibarra merged 7 commits into
mainfrom
qwen3.5-fp8-gb300-dynamo-sglang
Jul 13, 2026
Merged

Add Qwen3.5 FP8 GB300 disaggregated multinode SGLang benchmarks via Dynamo / 新增 Qwen3.5 FP8 GB300 分离式多节点 SGLang(Dynamo)基准测试#2137
adibarra merged 7 commits into
mainfrom
qwen3.5-fp8-gb300-dynamo-sglang

Conversation

@RohitNagraj

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

Adds the qwen3.5-fp8-gb300-dynamo-sglang config: Qwen3.5-397B-A17B-FP8 disaggregated multinode SGLang benchmarks via Dynamo on GB300, mirroring the gb200-fp8 recipe set.

  • 6 topologies across 1k/1k and 8k/1k: 1P1D TP4 STP + wide-EP (DEP4 prefill / DEP16 decode) from 1P1D up to 8P1D, recipes under benchmarks/multi_node/srt-slurm-recipes/sglang/qwen3.5/gb300-fp8/
  • Image: lmsysorg/sglang:nightly-dev-cu13-20260608-303757cc
  • Launch script: qwen3.5 fp8 runs against srt-slurm main (the hash-pinned dynamo source install needs its cargo/maturin bootstrap; same branch the gb200-fp8 recipes use) with --no-preflight for the compute-node-local model path, and overlays a header-based NVSHMEM resolver for the DeepEP kNumMaxTopK=16 rebuild (Qwen3.5 routes top-10 experts).

中文:新增 qwen3.5-fp8-gb300-dynamo-sglang 配置——Qwen3.5-397B-A17B-FP8 在 GB300 上的分离式多节点 SGLang(Dynamo)基准测试,与 gb200-fp8 配方集一致。覆盖 1k/1k 与 8k/1k 共 6 种拓扑(1P1D TP4 STP 及 1P1D 至 8P1D 宽 EP)。fp8 使用 srt-slurm main 分支,对计算节点本地模型路径使用 --no-preflight,并为 DeepEP kNumMaxTopK=16 重建覆盖基于头文件的 NVSHMEM 解析脚本。

…ynamo

6 topologies across 1k/1k and 8k/1k: 1P1D TP4 STP plus wide-EP (DEP4
prefill / DEP16 decode) from 1P1D up to 8P1D, mirroring the gb200-fp8
recipe set. Runs qwen3.5 fp8 against srt-slurm main (hash-pinned dynamo
source install needs its cargo/maturin bootstrap) with --no-preflight
for the compute-node-local model path, and overlays a header-based
NVSHMEM resolver for the DeepEP kNumMaxTopK=16 rebuild.

中文:新增 Qwen3.5 FP8 GB300 分离式多节点 SGLang(Dynamo)基准测试。
覆盖 1k/1k 与 8k/1k 共 6 种拓扑:1P1D TP4 STP 及 1P1D 至 8P1D 的宽 EP
(预填充 DEP4 / 解码 DEP16),与 gb200-fp8 配方集一致。fp8 使用
srt-slurm main 分支(哈希固定的 dynamo 源码安装需要其 cargo/maturin
引导),对计算节点本地模型路径使用 --no-preflight,并为 DeepEP
kNumMaxTopK=16 重建覆盖基于头文件的 NVSHMEM 解析脚本。
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the contribution! Please reach out to respective companies' CODEOWNER to fill in the latest PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md before pinging core maintainer on Slack for review. In order for the signoff PR check bot to trigger, you must follow the PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md template correctly, including the phrase As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have.

For PR verification, add the full-sweep-fail-fast label (strongly recommended) to this PR — the benchmark sweep only runs on labeled PRs. Use full-sweep-enabled only if you need matrix jobs to keep running past a failure.

PR authors are responsible for ensuring that after merging, all GitHub Action jobs fully pass. A lot of the time, failures are just flakes and simply re-running the failed jobs will fix it. See GitHub's docs on re-running failed jobs


感谢你的贡献!请联系相应公司的 CODEOWNER 填写最新的 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md,然后再在 Slack 上联系核心维护者进行审阅。为了触发 signoff PR 检查机器人,你必须正确遵循 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md 模板,包括保留英文语句 As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have

如需进行 PR 验证,请为此 PR 添加 full-sweep-fail-fast 标签(强烈推荐)— 基准测试 sweep 仅在带有标签的 PR 上运行。仅当需要矩阵任务在失败后继续运行时才使用 full-sweep-enabled

PR 作者有责任确保合并后所有 GitHub Action 任务完全通过。 很多时候失败只是偶发抖动(flake),重新运行失败的任务即可解决。参见 GitHub 关于重新运行失败任务的文档

1 similar comment
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the contribution! Please reach out to respective companies' CODEOWNER to fill in the latest PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md before pinging core maintainer on Slack for review. In order for the signoff PR check bot to trigger, you must follow the PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md template correctly, including the phrase As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have.

For PR verification, add the full-sweep-fail-fast label (strongly recommended) to this PR — the benchmark sweep only runs on labeled PRs. Use full-sweep-enabled only if you need matrix jobs to keep running past a failure.

PR authors are responsible for ensuring that after merging, all GitHub Action jobs fully pass. A lot of the time, failures are just flakes and simply re-running the failed jobs will fix it. See GitHub's docs on re-running failed jobs


感谢你的贡献!请联系相应公司的 CODEOWNER 填写最新的 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md,然后再在 Slack 上联系核心维护者进行审阅。为了触发 signoff PR 检查机器人,你必须正确遵循 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md 模板,包括保留英文语句 As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have

如需进行 PR 验证,请为此 PR 添加 full-sweep-fail-fast 标签(强烈推荐)— 基准测试 sweep 仅在带有标签的 PR 上运行。仅当需要矩阵任务在失败后继续运行时才使用 full-sweep-enabled

PR 作者有责任确保合并后所有 GitHub Action 任务完全通过。 很多时候失败只是偶发抖动(flake),重新运行失败的任务即可解决。参见 GitHub 关于重新运行失败任务的文档

中文:更新 perf-changelog 中 #2137 的 pr-link。
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Comment thread perf-changelog.yaml
Update the pinned container image from nightly-dev-cu13-20260608-303757cc
to nightly-dev-cu13-20260709-074bb928 across the master config entry, the
six gb300-fp8 recipes, and the perf-changelog entry.

中文:将 qwen3.5-fp8-gb300-dynamo-sglang 的容器镜像从
nightly-dev-cu13-20260608-303757cc 更新为
nightly-dev-cu13-20260709-074bb928,同步更新主配置条目、六个
gb300-fp8 配方及 perf-changelog 条目。
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

1 similar comment
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Ankur-singh

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have:

  • Verified that as of the moment of typing this, this is the latest version of PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md
  • Verified that the general code quality meets the InferenceX standard and does not make the code quality any worse.
  • Verified that this PR has passed PR validation. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that this PR passes evals. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that speculative decoding PRs uses chat templates to align the AL distribution to real world
  • Verified that the model architecture isn't changed with benchmark hacks like using --hf-overrides to skipping indexer for every x layers on models that don't natively support this. As a general rule, we won't accept optimizations that reduces the number of model architecture FLOPs. Anything that makes that same computation run faster is fair game; FLOPs at lower precisions is fine, given that the config passes private evals. As an general north star princple, we should only use optimizations which is used in production by customers that care about accuracy
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have verified that the respective vLLM submission made using upstream https://hub.docker.com/u/vllm docker repo, upstream SGLang https://hub.docker.com/u/lmsysorg docker repo. The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet as supported by vLLM/SGLang community maintainers
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class upstream in-tree LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have have verified that the respective vLLM/SGLang submission has been made before additional frameworks (TRT-LLM, ATOM, etc.). The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet.
  • Verified that the single-node recipes are similar to the official vLLM recipes and/or theSGLang cookbook:
    • If they are not, I have verified that a PR has been opened in vLLM recipe repo or SGLang repo and linked it below in the additional detail section:
  • If any of the above criteria cannot reasonably be satisfied, I have provided additional reasoning below.

Additional detail section:

Signed: ankur-singh

@Klaud-Cold

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

✅✅✅ Verdict: PASS ✅✅✅

✅ Check 0 (CODEOWNER): PASS — Ankur-singh is a listed owner of configs/nvidia-master.yaml; the remaining changed paths fall under the * catch-all.
✅ Check 1 (sweep on in-PR commit): PASS — head commit a4e55c6a has green, executed multi-node 1k1k/8k1k (6/6) and multi-node eval (3/3) jobs in run 29042476471; single-node *//eval / skipped only because the PR adds no single-node configs.
✅ Check 2 (evals pass): PASS — GSM8K em_strict 0.9682–0.9697 (n_eff 1319 each, 3 topologies) vs the qwen3.5 bar of 0.94 in utils/evals/thresholds.json, run on the PR's exact image lmsysorg/sglang:nightly-dev-cu13-20260709-074bb928.
➖ Check 3 (recipe link): N/A — disaggregated/multi-node submission (benchmarks/multi_node/**, multinode: true, disagg: true, framework: dynamo-sglang); the recipe-link requirement applies to single-node recipes only.
✅ Check 4 (reuse command): PASS — /reuse-sweep-run posted by RohitNagraj (COLLABORATOR).
✅ Check 5 (latest template): PASS — all current-template items present; the one unchecked item (single-node recipe link) is explained in the additional detail section.
✅ Check 6 (upstream image / engine-first): PASS — upstream lmsysorg/sglang image on GB300; the entry's engine is upstream SGLang (Dynamo is the disagg orchestrator, not a different engine), and qwen3.5-fp4-gb300-dynamo-sglang already covers this model+SKU.
✅ Check 7 (no arch hacks): PASS — no --hf-overrides/model-config edits; the DeepEP kNumMaxTopK 8→16 rebuild raises kernel buffer capacity to fit Qwen3.5's native top-10 expert routing (no FLOPs removed).
➖ Check 8 (spec-decode chat template): N/A — all lanes are spec-decoding: "none" (STP-only); no speculative flags in the recipes.

Comment thread benchmarks/multi_node/srt-slurm-recipes/configs/rebuild-deepep.sh Outdated
…pk=10

The DeepEP snapshot baked into the GB cu13 sglang images caps the
low-latency dispatch/combine paths at kNumMaxTopK=11, which already
accommodates Qwen3.5's top-10 expert routing. The only lower cap
(kNumMaxTopk=9) is in the opt-in overlapped-combine kernel, which these
recipes do not enable. Drop setup_script: rebuild-deepep.sh from the
wide-EP recipes, the vendored rebuild script, and its launch-script
overlay. No other sglang recipe carries a setup script.

中文:移除 DeepEP 重建步骤——GB cu13 sglang 镜像内置的 DeepEP 低延迟
dispatch/combine 路径默认 kNumMaxTopK=11,已满足 Qwen3.5 的 top-10 专家
路由;唯一更低的上限(kNumMaxTopk=9)位于这些配方未启用的 overlapped-
combine 内核中。删除宽 EP 配方中的 setup_script、内置重建脚本及启动
脚本中的覆盖逻辑。
…amo-sglang

# Conflicts:
#	perf-changelog.yaml
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

1 similar comment
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Pin the source-install path to the latest published srt-slurm release instead of the moving main branch.

中文:将 Qwen3.5 FP8 的 srt-slurm 源码安装路径从持续变化的 main 分支固定到最新发布标签 v1.0.25。
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

1 similar comment
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@RohitNagraj

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

/reuse-sweep-run

@RohitNagraj

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

/reuse-sweep-run

@Ankur-singh

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have:

  • Verified that as of the moment of typing this, this is the latest version of PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md
  • Verified that the general code quality meets the InferenceX standard and does not make the code quality any worse.
  • Verified that this PR has passed PR validation. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that this PR passes evals. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that speculative decoding PRs uses chat templates to align the AL distribution to real world
  • For agentic workloads: verified that speculative-decoding configs (EAGLE / MTP / draft models) run with simulated synthetic acceptance, with the acceptance-length value taken from the committed golden AL curve in golden_al_distribution/ for that model, thinking mode, and draft length. A submission may choose any supported draft length, but it may not substitute a different acceptance target.
  • Verified that the model architecture isn't changed with benchmark hacks like using --hf-overrides to skipping indexer for every x layers on models that don't natively support this. As a general rule, we won't accept optimizations that reduces the number of model architecture FLOPs. Anything that makes that same computation run faster is fair game; FLOPs at lower precisions is fine, given that the config passes private evals. As an general north star princple, we should only use optimizations which is used in production by customers that care about accuracy
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have verified that the respective vLLM submission made using upstream https://hub.docker.com/u/vllm docker repo, upstream SGLang https://hub.docker.com/u/lmsysorg docker repo. The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet as supported by vLLM/SGLang community maintainers
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class upstream in-tree LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have have verified that the respective vLLM/SGLang submission has been made before additional frameworks (TRT-LLM, ATOM, etc.). The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet.
  • Verified that the single-node recipes are similar to the official vLLM recipes and/or theSGLang cookbook:
    • If they are not, I have verified that a PR has been opened in vLLM recipe repo or SGLang repo and linked it below in the additional detail section:
  • Verified that this PR does not patch the inference engine or serving stack — the pinned image must run as shipped. This covers .patch files / git apply / patch, inline patches embedded in benchmark scripts (e.g. a python3/sed heredoc that rewrites installed engine sources before serving), in-place edits of site-packages, monkey-patching, overwriting container files, and installing forked/rebuilt engine wheels on top of the pinned image. The only exception is a patch covered by a filled-out waiver at docs/waiver/<PR_NUMBER>.md — named after the PR that introduces the patch and filed in that same PR, stating what is patched, why the unmodified upstream image cannot run this benchmark, the upstream PR/issue link, and the removal plan — which I have linked below in the additional detail section.
  • If any of the above criteria cannot reasonably be satisfied, I have provided additional reasoning below.

Additional detail section:

Signed: ankur-singh

@adibarra
adibarra merged commit f860759 into main Jul 13, 2026
26 checks passed
@adibarra
adibarra deleted the qwen3.5-fp8-gb300-dynamo-sglang branch July 13, 2026 18:52
@Klaud-Cold

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

✅✅✅ Verdict: PASS ✅✅✅

✅ Check 0 (CODEOWNER): PASS — Ankur-singh is a listed owner of configs/nvidia-master.yaml; all other changed paths fall under the * catch-all.
✅ Check 1 (sweep on in-PR commit): PASS — in-PR commit baeb99b6 has green, executed multi-node 1k1k/8k1k (6/6 configs) and multi-node eval / (3/3) jobs in run 29207681289, the run linked in the sign-off; single-node *//eval / are skipped only because the PR adds no single-node configs. Head 12caf0bb is a clean merge of main with no recipe changes.
✅ Check 2 (evals pass): PASS — GSM8K em_strict 0.9682–0.9712 (n_eff 1319, 3 topologies) vs the qwen3.5 bar of 0.94 in utils/evals/thresholds.json, run on the PR's exact image lmsysorg/sglang:nightly-dev-cu13-20260709-074bb928.
➖ Check 3 (recipe link): N/A — disaggregated/multi-node submission (benchmarks/multi_node/**, multinode: true, disagg: true, framework: dynamo-sglang); the recipe-link requirement applies to single-node recipes only.
✅ Check 4 (reuse command): PASS — /reuse-sweep-run posted by RohitNagraj (COLLABORATOR).
✅ Check 5 (latest template): PASS — all current-template items present; the unchecked single-node recipe items are explained in the additional detail section.
✅ Check 6 (upstream image / engine-first): PASS — upstream lmsysorg/sglang image on GB300; the engine is upstream SGLang (Dynamo is the disagg orchestrator, not a different engine), and qwen3.5-fp4-gb300-dynamo-sglang already covers this model+SKU.
✅ Check 7 (no arch hacks): PASS — no --hf-overrides/model-config edits; fp8 KV cache and mamba-ssm-dtype: bfloat16 are precision knobs, and evals pass.
➖ Check 8 (spec-decode chat template): N/A — all lanes are spec-decoding: "none"; no speculative flags in the recipes.
✅ Check 9 (no engine patches): PASS — the prior DeepEP rebuild/setup script is removed at this head, matching the sign-off; the launcher only pins srt-slurm (harness) to v1.0.25 and overlays recipe YAMLs, so the pinned image runs as shipped.
➖ Check 10 (agentic golden AL): N/A — no agentic spec-decode configs, and no synthetic-acceptance knobs anywhere in the diff.

csahithi added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2026
Resolve conflicts from #2137 (Qwen3.5-FP8 GB300 SGLang):
- configs/nvidia-master.yaml: keep our dsv4 agentic keys and main's new
  qwen3.5-fp8-gb300-dynamo-sglang key (both at EOF).
- perf-changelog.yaml: keep main's qwen3.5-fp8 entry and our dsv4 entry
  (appended at EOF); drop the "Prune ... (decode-side MTP only)" description line.
- launch_gb300-nv.sh auto-merged (our v1.0.10 block + main's qwen3.5-fp8 routing).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants