Fix triton sliding window test case

[merrymercy]

kill the process correctly

[gemini-code-assist]

Hello @merrymercy, 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!

Summary of Changes

Hello team, gemini-code-assist here to provide a summary of this pull request. This PR aims to improve the reliability of the Triton sliding window test case (test_triton_sliding_window.py). The primary goal, as indicated by the title and description, is to ensure that the server process launched by the test is correctly and reliably terminated, even if the test encounters errors. Additionally, the PR makes some minor adjustments to the test logic and skips one test case in CI environments to potentially reduce execution time.

Highlights

• Reliable Process Termination: The test now uses try...finally blocks to ensure that the server process launched for testing is killed using kill_process_tree regardless of whether the test assertions pass or fail. This prevents orphaned processes.
• CI Optimization: The test_no_cuda_graph test case is now skipped when running in a Continuous Integration environment, likely to reduce the overall CI execution time.
• Assertion Adjustment: The minimum acceptable score for the MMLU test case has been slightly lowered from 0.61 to 0.605.
• Code Cleanup: Unused imports (time) and an empty tearDownClass method have been removed, along with a fixed time.sleep(5) call after process termination, as the try...finally block handles cleanup.

Changelog

• test/srt/test_triton_sliding_window.py
  • Wrapped test execution and process termination in try...finally blocks for both test_no_cuda_graph and test_cuda_graph methods to ensure cleanup.
  • Removed the time.sleep(5) call after process termination.
  • Added @unittest.skipIf(is_in_ci(), ...) decorator to test_no_cuda_graph to skip it in CI.
  • Imported is_in_ci from test_utils.
  • Slightly adjusted the MMLU score assertion threshold from 0.61 to 0.605.
  • Removed unused import time.
  • Removed the empty tearDownClass method.

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

1. 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. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request addresses a critical issue in the Triton sliding window test case by ensuring the server process is correctly terminated, even if the test encounters an error. It also adjusts an assertion threshold and skips a test in CI to potentially improve stability and reduce execution time. The core fix for process termination is a significant improvement.

Summary of Findings

• Reliable Process Termination: The core issue of orphaned server processes on test failure has been addressed by wrapping test execution in try...finally blocks, ensuring kill_process_tree is always called. This is a high-severity improvement for test stability.
• Assertion Threshold Adjustment: The MMLU score assertion threshold was slightly lowered. This might indicate test flakiness or a minor performance change. Further context on the reason for this change would be beneficial (medium severity).
• CI Test Skipping: One test configuration (test_no_cuda_graph) is now skipped in CI to reduce execution time. While understandable, this reduces automated test coverage for that specific path (medium severity).

Merge Readiness

The pull request implements a critical fix for test reliability by ensuring processes are killed correctly. This is a significant improvement. There are minor points regarding the assertion threshold change and the CI test skip that warrant discussion or clarification, but they might not necessarily block merging depending on the team's policy on test flakiness and coverage trade-offs. I recommend reviewing the comments, particularly the medium severity ones, and deciding if they need to be addressed before merging. I am unable to approve the pull request myself; please have other reviewers approve this code before merging.

[gemini-code-assist]

Wrapping the test calls within a try...finally block is an excellent improvement. This ensures that the kill_process_tree function is always called, even if one of the test methods (_test_short_context_generation, _test_long_context_generation, _test_mmlu) raises an exception. This prevents orphaned server processes, which was a significant issue for test reliability.

[gemini-code-assist]

Similarly, applying the try...finally block here ensures the cuda_graph_process is reliably terminated. This is a crucial fix for the stability and cleanup of the test environment.

[gemini-code-assist]

The assertion threshold for the MMLU score has been slightly reduced. Could you please provide some context on why this change was necessary? Was the test flaky at the previous threshold, or does this reflect a slight change in expected model performance?

[gemini-code-assist]

Skipping this test in CI helps reduce execution time, which is valuable. However, it means the no_cuda_graph configuration is not tested in the automated CI pipeline. Is there a plan to test this configuration elsewhere (e.g., nightly builds, specific test runs) to ensure it doesn't regress?