Skip to content

[bugfix] remove the EP buffer allocation introduced by fused-op dispatch_ffn_c…#5284

Merged
zzzzwwjj merged 1 commit intovllm-project:mainfrom
kiscad:fix-utils
Dec 24, 2025
Merged

[bugfix] remove the EP buffer allocation introduced by fused-op dispatch_ffn_c…#5284
zzzzwwjj merged 1 commit intovllm-project:mainfrom
kiscad:fix-utils

Conversation

@kiscad
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@kiscad kiscad commented Dec 23, 2025

What this PR does / why we need it?

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

How was this patch tested?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
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 removes the calculate_ep_buffer_size function and its usage for configuring the buffer size for the 'ep' (expert parallel) process group. This change appears to be a cleanup of obsolete code. Based on the pull request title, this specific buffer allocation was likely introduced for the dispatch_ffn_combine fused operator. The codebase indicates that this operator now uses the 'mc2' communication group, which has a different buffer configuration mechanism, rendering the 'ep' buffer calculation unnecessary. By removing this, the 'ep' group will fall back to using the default buffer size, which is appropriate for its remaining uses. The change is sound and improves code maintainability by removing dead code.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM Ascend project. The following points will speed up your PR merge:‌‌

  • A PR should do only one thing, smaller PRs enable faster reviews.
  • Every PR should include unit tests and end-to-end tests ‌to ensure it works and is not broken by other future PRs.
  • Write the commit message by fulfilling the PR description to help reviewer and future developers understand.

If CI fails, you can run linting and testing checks locally according Contributing and Testing.

@kiscad kiscad changed the title remove the EP buffer allocation introduced by fused-op dispatch_ffn_c… [bugfix] remove the EP buffer allocation introduced by fused-op dispatch_ffn_c… Dec 23, 2025
@weijinqian0 weijinqian0 added ready read for review ready-for-test start test by label for PR labels Dec 23, 2025
…ombine

Signed-off-by: Chen Chen <0109chenchen@gmail.com>
@zzzzwwjj zzzzwwjj merged commit 9227e6a into vllm-project:main Dec 24, 2025
10 checks passed
ZRJ026 pushed a commit to ZRJ026/vllm-ascend that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2026
…tch_ffn_c… (vllm-project#5284)

### What this PR does / why we need it?

- This PR removes the Expert Parallel (EP) HCCL buffer allocation that
was previously introduced by the fused-op `dispatch_ffn_combine` (vllm-project#3532
), since the fused-op has switch to MC2 HCCL buffer (vllm-project#5156 ).

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?

### How was this patch tested?

- vLLM version: release/v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
vllm-project/vllm@ad32e3e

Signed-off-by: Chen Chen <0109chenchen@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: zrj026 <zhangrunjiang026@gmail.com>
ZRJ026 pushed a commit to ZRJ026/vllm-ascend that referenced this pull request Mar 4, 2026
…tch_ffn_c… (vllm-project#5284)

### What this PR does / why we need it?

- This PR removes the Expert Parallel (EP) HCCL buffer allocation that
was previously introduced by the fused-op `dispatch_ffn_combine` (vllm-project#3532
), since the fused-op has switch to MC2 HCCL buffer (vllm-project#5156 ).

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?

### How was this patch tested?

- vLLM version: release/v0.13.0
- vLLM main:
vllm-project/vllm@ad32e3e

Signed-off-by: Chen Chen <0109chenchen@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: zrj026 <zhangrunjiang026@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

module:core ready read for review ready-for-test start test by label for PR

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants