-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
fix(frontend): select the earliest matching stop sequence #14848
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
Hi @bzsuni, can you share more context / motivation on this change?
vLLM and SGLang behave differently on this functionality.
Before this PR, dynamo's stop sequence behavior fully matches sglang's stop sequence behavior across the board, but only matches vllm behavior on some of the cases, see below:
For decoded fragment
"there", cells show the selected stop string:["her", "he"]"her""her""her""he"["he", "her"]"he""he""he""he"["re", "here"]"re""here""re""re"["here", "re"]"here""here""here""here"["here", "the"]"here""the""here""the"After this PR, dynamo behavior does not fully match either vllm or sglang, it is a hybrid of the two.
I'm not sure if this is a net win, so I'm looking for more context/motivation from you on the change here to better understand the need.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Thanks for the detailed comparison, @rmccorm4. I looked into this more and I think my original assumption in this PR was wrong.
Dynamo already processes engine output token-by-token in
dynamo/lib/llm/src/backend.rs
Lines 1043 to 1072 in 0951489
token_ids, callsstep()for each token, and returns as soon as one triggers a stop. So the speculative-decoding issue that motivated vLLM#49391 doesn't directly apply here.The remaining Dynamo case is much narrower: multiple stop strings matching inside the decoded text of a single token. SGLang doesn't really define this case either — its detokenizer still has an explicit TODO for multiple stop strings being hit
So the earliest-start rule in this PR was based on my incorrect assumption. I don't see enough correctness benefit to justify changing Dynamo's existing semantics here, so I'm going to close this. Thanks for catching it.