Skip to content

Conversation

@tdene
Copy link
Contributor

@tdene tdene commented Jan 6, 2026

What does this PR do ?

⚠️ For major changes (either in lines of code or in its impact), please make sure to first share a design doc with the team. If you're unsure what's the best way to do so, contact the @megatron-oncall.

Contribution process

flowchart LR
    A[Pre-checks] --> B[PR Tests]
    subgraph Code Review/Approval
        C1[Expert Review] --> C2[Final Review]
    end
    B --> C1
    C2 --> D[Merge]
Loading

Pre-checks

  • I want this PR in a versioned release and have added the appropriate Milestone (e.g., Core 0.8)
  • I have added relevant unit tests
  • I have added relevant functional tests
  • I have added proper typing to my code Typing guidelines
  • I have added relevant documentation
  • I have run the autoformatter.sh on my PR

Code review

The following process is enforced via the CODEOWNERS file for changes into megatron/core. For changes outside of megatron/core, it is up to the PR author whether or not to tag the Final Reviewer team.

For MRs into `main` branch

Feel free to message or comment the @megatron-oncall to help accelerate your merge into main. The less complex your PR is, the faster it will be approved and merged!

(Step 1): Add PR label Expert Review

(Step 2): Collect the expert reviewers reviews

  1. Attach the Expert Review label when your PR is ready for review.
  2. GitHub auto-assigns expert reviewers based on your changes. They will get notified and pick up your PR soon.

⚠️ Only proceed to the next step once all reviewers have approved, merge-conflict are resolved and the CI is passing.
Final Review might get declined if these requirements are not fulfilled.

(Step 3): Final Review

  1. Add Final Review label
  2. GitHub auto-assigns final reviewers based on your changes. They will get notified and pick up your PR soon.

(Optional Step 4): Cherry-pick into release branch

If this PR also needs to be merged into core_r* release branches, after this PR has been merged, select Cherry-pick to open a new PR into the release branch.

For MRs into `dev` branch The proposed review process for `dev` branch is under active discussion.

MRs are mergable after one approval by either [email protected] or [email protected].

Merging your PR

Any member of core-adlr and core-nemo will be able to merge your PR.

@copy-pr-bot
Copy link

copy-pr-bot bot commented Jan 6, 2026

Auto-sync is disabled for draft pull requests in this repository. Workflows must be run manually.

Contributors can view more details about this message here.

@tdene tdene changed the title Supporting infernce when called within an asyncio loop (Pythonic) Supporting inference when called within an asyncio loop (Pythonic) Jan 6, 2026
@tdene tdene force-pushed the tde/fix_asyncio_issue branch from 5a544f2 to 88c0f44 Compare January 6, 2026 14:02
@tdene tdene force-pushed the tde/fix_asyncio_issue branch from 88c0f44 to 3fa8916 Compare January 6, 2026 14:19
inference_requests=inference_requests,
)

async def async_generate(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you make generate_using_dynamic call this . I think this will create a chain of async functions. Hmm or the client code needs to change. (Direct switch from static to dynamic under the hood might not work )

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can't, unfortunately. generate_using_dynamic is synchronous. In Python, async and sync contexts don't work together well.

The Pythonic way to handle this is to always provide 2 methods: async def async_generate and def generate, where def generate just calls run_until_complete(async_generate). This is the way almost all libraries handle async / sync.

It's annoying, but this is the way Python is designed. As discussed here, the issue with #2816 is that it is blocking and can reduce user perf. The issue with this #2831 is that the user has to pick the correct method: either async_generate or generate.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants