-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9k
[Misc] Qwen MoE model supports LoRA #20932
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
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Jee Jee Li <[email protected]>
👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM project. 💬 Join our developer Slack at https://slack.vllm.ai to discuss your PR in #pr-reviews, coordinate on features in #feat- channels, or join special interest groups in #sig- channels. Just a reminder: PRs would not trigger full CI run by default. Instead, it would only run Once the PR is approved and ready to go, your PR reviewer(s) can run CI to test the changes comprehensively before merging. To run CI, PR reviewers can either: Add 🚀 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Summary of Changes
Hello @jeejeelee, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request extends LoRA support to Qwen Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models by explicitly marking them as LoRA-compatible. It also integrates a mechanism to detect the presence of FusedMoE
layers within a model and provides a clear warning to users about the current lack of support for LoRA inference on FusedMoE
expert weights, guiding them on how to proceed with LoRA fine-tuning.
Highlights
- LoRA Compatibility for Qwen MoE Models: I've updated the
Qwen2MoeForCausalLM
andQwen3MoeForCausalLM
classes to inherit fromSupportsLoRA
, formally declaring their compatibility with LoRA within vLLM's framework. - Fused MoE LoRA Inference Warning: I've introduced a new utility function
is_moe_model
to detect if a model containsFusedMoE
layers. If detected, a warning is now issued to users, clarifying that vLLM currently does not support LoRA inference forFusedMoE
expert weights. This helps guide users on current limitations and best practices.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command>
or @gemini-code-assist <command>
. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
Feature | Command | Description |
---|---|---|
Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/
folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this 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 adds a warning for LoRA on MoE models with FusedMoE
layers, as this is currently unsupported. It also enables LoRA for Qwen2 and Qwen3 MoE models. The changes look good and align with the PR's goal. I've added a couple of suggestions to improve code clarity and maintainability regarding the new warning mechanism.
@@ -375,6 +375,7 @@ def __init__( | |||
# text modules (e.g. ChatGLM) | |||
and hasattr(self.model, "get_mm_mapping")) | |||
self.is_pooling_model = is_pooling_model(self.model) | |||
self.is_moe_model = is_moe_model(self.model) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The attribute self.is_moe_model
is initialized here, seemingly just to trigger the warning inside is_moe_model
. If this attribute is not intended for future use within the LoRAModelManager
class, it would be clearer to call is_moe_model
without assigning its result to an attribute, indicating that only its side effect (the warning) is desired. For example:
is_moe_model(self.model)
If you do plan to use self.is_moe_model
later, please consider adding a comment explaining its purpose.
Signed-off-by: Jee Jee Li <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jee Jee Li <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Signed-off-by: Jee Jee Li <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Himanshu Jaju <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jee Jee Li <[email protected]>
Essential Elements of an Effective PR Description Checklist
supported_models.md
andexamples
for a new model.Purpose
Currently we do not support
FusedMoE
LoRA inference, so we add relevant warnings for users.Fix #18120 (comment)
Test Plan
Test Result
(Optional) Documentation Update