Skip to content

[AMD][AgentX] MINIMAX-M3 FP4 MI355X agentX vLLM - #2118

Merged
cquil11 merged 59 commits into
mainfrom
amd/agentx-minimax-m3-vllm
Jul 28, 2026
Merged

[AMD][AgentX] MINIMAX-M3 FP4 MI355X agentX vLLM#2118
cquil11 merged 59 commits into
mainfrom
amd/agentx-minimax-m3-vllm

Conversation

@ajith-sirra-amd

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

  • Add MiniMax-M3 FP4 single-node agentic benchmark support on MI355X using vLLM
  • New script: benchmarks/single_node/agentic/minimaxm3_fp4_mi355x.sh with three KV offload backends: none , native (vLLM OffloadingConnector), lmcache (LMCache MP server + LMCacheMPConnector)
  • New master config entry minimaxm3-fp4-mi355x-vllm-agentic with TP4 search space across none, native, and lmcache backends
  • Image: vllm/vllm-openai-rocm:nightly-69715823df89b11ee684b84066390cbb9092d5c1
  • Model: amd/MiniMax-M3-MXFP4

Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the contribution! Please reach out to respective companies' CODEOWNER to fill in the latest PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md before pinging core maintainer on Slack for review. In order for the signoff PR check bot to trigger, you must follow the PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md template correctly, including the phrase As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have.

For PR verification, add the full-sweep-fail-fast label (strongly recommended) to this PR — the benchmark sweep only runs on labeled PRs. Use full-sweep-enabled only if you need matrix jobs to keep running past a failure.

PR authors are responsible for ensuring that after merging, all GitHub Action jobs fully pass. A lot of the time, failures are just flakes and simply re-running the failed jobs will fix it. See GitHub's docs on re-running failed jobs


感谢你的贡献!请联系相应公司的 CODEOWNER 填写最新的 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md,然后再在 Slack 上联系核心维护者进行审阅。为了触发 signoff PR 检查机器人,你必须正确遵循 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md 模板,包括保留英文语句 As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have

如需进行 PR 验证,请为此 PR 添加 full-sweep-fail-fast 标签(强烈推荐)— 基准测试 sweep 仅在带有标签的 PR 上运行。仅当需要矩阵任务在失败后继续运行时才使用 full-sweep-enabled

PR 作者有责任确保合并后所有 GitHub Action 任务完全通过。 很多时候失败只是偶发抖动(flake),重新运行失败的任务即可解决。参见 GitHub 关于重新运行失败任务的文档

2 similar comments
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the contribution! Please reach out to respective companies' CODEOWNER to fill in the latest PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md before pinging core maintainer on Slack for review. In order for the signoff PR check bot to trigger, you must follow the PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md template correctly, including the phrase As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have.

For PR verification, add the full-sweep-fail-fast label (strongly recommended) to this PR — the benchmark sweep only runs on labeled PRs. Use full-sweep-enabled only if you need matrix jobs to keep running past a failure.

PR authors are responsible for ensuring that after merging, all GitHub Action jobs fully pass. A lot of the time, failures are just flakes and simply re-running the failed jobs will fix it. See GitHub's docs on re-running failed jobs


感谢你的贡献!请联系相应公司的 CODEOWNER 填写最新的 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md,然后再在 Slack 上联系核心维护者进行审阅。为了触发 signoff PR 检查机器人,你必须正确遵循 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md 模板,包括保留英文语句 As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have

如需进行 PR 验证,请为此 PR 添加 full-sweep-fail-fast 标签(强烈推荐)— 基准测试 sweep 仅在带有标签的 PR 上运行。仅当需要矩阵任务在失败后继续运行时才使用 full-sweep-enabled

PR 作者有责任确保合并后所有 GitHub Action 任务完全通过。 很多时候失败只是偶发抖动(flake),重新运行失败的任务即可解决。参见 GitHub 关于重新运行失败任务的文档

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks for the contribution! Please reach out to respective companies' CODEOWNER to fill in the latest PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md before pinging core maintainer on Slack for review. In order for the signoff PR check bot to trigger, you must follow the PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md template correctly, including the phrase As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have.

For PR verification, add the full-sweep-fail-fast label (strongly recommended) to this PR — the benchmark sweep only runs on labeled PRs. Use full-sweep-enabled only if you need matrix jobs to keep running past a failure.

PR authors are responsible for ensuring that after merging, all GitHub Action jobs fully pass. A lot of the time, failures are just flakes and simply re-running the failed jobs will fix it. See GitHub's docs on re-running failed jobs


感谢你的贡献!请联系相应公司的 CODEOWNER 填写最新的 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md,然后再在 Slack 上联系核心维护者进行审阅。为了触发 signoff PR 检查机器人,你必须正确遵循 PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md 模板,包括保留英文语句 As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have

如需进行 PR 验证,请为此 PR 添加 full-sweep-fail-fast 标签(强烈推荐)— 基准测试 sweep 仅在带有标签的 PR 上运行。仅当需要矩阵任务在失败后继续运行时才使用 full-sweep-enabled

PR 作者有责任确保合并后所有 GitHub Action 任务完全通过。 很多时候失败只是偶发抖动(flake),重新运行失败的任务即可解决。参见 GitHub 关于重新运行失败任务的文档

Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
@seungrokj seungrokj changed the title [AMD] MINIMAX-M3 FP4 vLLM Agentic Support [AMD] MINIMAX-M3 FP4 MI355X agentX vLLM Jul 8, 2026
@seungrokj seungrokj added the AMD label Jul 8, 2026
Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
Comment thread benchmarks/single_node/agentic/minimaxm3_fp4_mi355x.sh
Comment thread benchmarks/single_node/agentic/minimaxm3_fp4_mi355x.sh Outdated
Comment thread benchmarks/single_node/agentic/minimaxm3_fp4_mi355x.sh Outdated
Comment thread configs/amd-master.yaml Outdated
Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
…& Fixing MODEL_PATH Arg in Serve Command.

Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
…& Fixing MODEL_PATH Arg in Serve Command.

Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Comment thread configs/amd-master.yaml Outdated
seungrokj and others added 2 commits July 9, 2026 10:26
…hmark

Drop lmcache case branch, helper functions, and config entry; keep
native-only offload path. Add OFFLOAD_ARGS fallback, enable prefix
caching and hybrid KV cache manager, bump max-num-seqs to 2x CONC.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

seungrokj and others added 2 commits July 9, 2026 12:35
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: ajith-sirra-amd <ajith.sirra@amd.com>
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

seungrokj and others added 2 commits July 28, 2026 17:29
…ntic recipe

- minimaxm3_fp4_mi355x.sh: export EVAL_FRAMEWORK=lm-eval so run_eval never
  falls back to the agentic swebench default.
- benchmark_lib.sh: drop the Modal deployment_timeout override.
- amd-master.yaml: restore agentic conc-list to [1, 4, 8, 16].

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ajith-sirra-amd ajith-sirra-amd added full-sweep-enabled and removed full-sweep-fail-fast evals-only Suppress throughput and run only eval jobs; combine with all-evals to expand selection labels Jul 28, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@seungrokj

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

/reuse-sweep-run

@seungrokj
seungrokj self-requested a review July 28, 2026 13:38

@seungrokj seungrokj left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have:

  • Verified that as of the moment of typing this, this is the latest version of PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md
  • Verified that the general code quality meets the InferenceX standard and does not make the code quality any worse.
  • Verified that this PR has passed PR validation. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that this PR passes evals. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that speculative decoding PRs uses chat templates to align the AL distribution to real world
  • For agentic workloads: verified that speculative-decoding configs (EAGLE / MTP / draft models) run with simulated synthetic acceptance, with the acceptance-length value taken from the committed golden AL curve in golden_al_distribution/ for that model, thinking mode, and draft length. A submission may choose any supported draft length, but it may not substitute a different acceptance target.
  • Verified that the model architecture isn't changed with benchmark hacks like using --hf-overrides to skipping indexer for every x layers on models that don't natively support this. As a general rule, we won't accept optimizations that reduces the number of model architecture FLOPs. Anything that makes that same computation run faster is fair game; FLOPs at lower precisions is fine, given that the config passes private evals. As an general north star princple, we should only use optimizations which is used in production by customers that care about accuracy
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have verified that the respective vLLM submission made using upstream https://hub.docker.com/u/vllm docker repo, upstream SGLang https://hub.docker.com/u/lmsysorg docker repo. The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet as supported by vLLM/SGLang community maintainers
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class upstream in-tree LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have have verified that the respective vLLM/SGLang submission has been made before additional frameworks (TRT-LLM, ATOM, etc.). The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet.
  • Verified that every single-node vLLM/SGLang recipe in this PR is documented in the official vLLM recipes and/or the SGLang cookbook:
    • I linked the corresponding upstream PR in the vLLM recipe repo or SGLang repo and verified that it is MERGED before this InferenceX PR merges. An opened, draft, or closed-without-merge upstream PR does not satisfy this requirement. If the matching recipe was already published, I linked the published recipe/cookbook page in the additional detail section below.
  • Verified that this PR does not patch the inference engine or serving stack — the pinned image must run as shipped. This covers .patch files / git apply / patch, inline patches embedded in benchmark scripts (e.g. a python3/sed heredoc that rewrites installed engine sources before serving), in-place edits of site-packages, monkey-patching, overwriting container files, and installing forked/rebuilt engine wheels on top of the pinned image. The only exception is a patch covered by a filled-out waiver at docs/waiver/<PR_NUMBER>.md — named after the PR that introduces the patch and filed in that same PR, stating what is patched, why the unmodified upstream image cannot run this benchmark, the upstream PR/issue link, and the removal plan — which I have linked below in the additional detail section.
  • If any of the above criteria cannot reasonably be satisfied, I have provided additional reasoning below.

Additional detail section:

Signed: seungrokj

@Klaud-Cold

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

❌❌❌ REJECTED ❌❌❌

@seungrokj — two blockers: the upstream recipe PR (vllm-project/recipes#631) is still OPEN (must be MERGED and linked in the sign-off's additional detail section), and the sign-off checklist was posted with every item unchecked and an empty additional detail section. Please merge the upstream recipe, then re-post a filled-out sign-off.

✅ Check 0 (CODEOWNER): PASS — seungrokj is a listed owner of configs/amd-master.yaml; remaining paths are catch-all.
✅ Check 1 (sweep on in-PR commit): PASS — head 4aebb99 ran green executed agentic benchmark (c1/c4/c8/c16) + agentic eval jobs in run 30346826643.
✅ Check 2 (evals pass): PASS — GSM8K em_strict 0.9507 ≥ 0.90 threshold, on the same image as this PR's config (vllm/vllm-openai-rocm:nightly-dcfebf93f4...).
❌ Check 3 (merged recipe link): FAIL — no recipe link in the sign-off's additional detail section (it is the untouched template placeholder), and the upstream recipe PR vllm-project/recipes#631 is OPEN, not merged.
✅ Check 4 (reuse command): PASS — /reuse-sweep-run posted by seungrokj (COLLABORATOR).
❌ Check 5 (latest checklist, filled out): FAIL — the sign-off uses the current template but ALL items are unchecked ([ ]) with no explanation in the additional detail section; every item must be checked or explained.
✅ Check 6 (upstream image / engine-first): PASS — vllm/vllm-openai-rocm is the upstream vLLM org image; framework is vLLM so engine-first ordering is satisfied.
✅ Check 7 (no architecture hacks): PASS — no --hf-overrides/override args; --language-model-only matches ~90 existing MiniMax recipes and does not reduce text-path FLOPs.
➖ Check 8 (spec-decode chat template): N/A — no speculative-decoding changes.
✅ Check 9 (no engine patches): PASS — script installs harness/client deps only; no patching of the serving stack.
➖ Check 10 (agentic golden AL): N/A — agentic config but no speculative decoding.

@seungrokj
seungrokj self-requested a review July 28, 2026 13:46

@seungrokj seungrokj left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have:

  • Verified that as of the moment of typing this, this is the latest version of PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md
  • Verified that the general code quality meets the InferenceX standard and does not make the code quality any worse.
  • Verified that this PR has passed PR validation. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that this PR passes evals. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that speculative decoding PRs uses chat templates to align the AL distribution to real world
  • For agentic workloads: verified that speculative-decoding configs (EAGLE / MTP / draft models) run with simulated synthetic acceptance, with the acceptance-length value taken from the committed golden AL curve in golden_al_distribution/ for that model, thinking mode, and draft length. A submission may choose any supported draft length, but it may not substitute a different acceptance target.
  • Verified that the model architecture isn't changed with benchmark hacks like using --hf-overrides to skipping indexer for every x layers on models that don't natively support this. As a general rule, we won't accept optimizations that reduces the number of model architecture FLOPs. Anything that makes that same computation run faster is fair game; FLOPs at lower precisions is fine, given that the config passes private evals. As an general north star princple, we should only use optimizations which is used in production by customers that care about accuracy
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have verified that the respective vLLM submission made using upstream https://hub.docker.com/u/vllm docker repo, upstream SGLang https://hub.docker.com/u/lmsysorg docker repo. The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet as supported by vLLM/SGLang community maintainers
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class upstream in-tree LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have have verified that the respective vLLM/SGLang submission has been made before additional frameworks (TRT-LLM, ATOM, etc.). The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet.
  • Verified that every single-node vLLM/SGLang recipe in this PR is documented in the official vLLM recipes and/or the SGLang cookbook:
    • I linked the corresponding upstream PR in the vLLM recipe repo or SGLang repo and verified that it is MERGED before this InferenceX PR merges. An opened, draft, or closed-without-merge upstream PR does not satisfy this requirement. If the matching recipe was already published, I linked the published recipe/cookbook page in the additional detail section below.
  • Verified that this PR does not patch the inference engine or serving stack — the pinned image must run as shipped. This covers .patch files / git apply / patch, inline patches embedded in benchmark scripts (e.g. a python3/sed heredoc that rewrites installed engine sources before serving), in-place edits of site-packages, monkey-patching, overwriting container files, and installing forked/rebuilt engine wheels on top of the pinned image. The only exception is a patch covered by a filled-out waiver at docs/waiver/<PR_NUMBER>.md — named after the PR that introduces the patch and filed in that same PR, stating what is patched, why the unmodified upstream image cannot run this benchmark, the upstream PR/issue link, and the removal plan — which I have linked below in the additional detail section.
  • If any of the above criteria cannot reasonably be satisfied, I have provided additional reasoning below.

Additional detail section:

Signed: seungrokj

@seungrokj
seungrokj self-requested a review July 28, 2026 13:49

@seungrokj seungrokj left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As a PR reviewer and CODEOWNER, I have reviewed this and have:

  • Verified that as of the moment of typing this, this is the latest version of PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md
  • Verified that the general code quality meets the InferenceX standard and does not make the code quality any worse.
  • Verified that this PR has passed PR validation. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that this PR passes evals. Please link to GitHub Action workflow that shows this.
  • Verified that speculative decoding PRs uses chat templates to align the AL distribution to real world
  • For agentic workloads: verified that speculative-decoding configs (EAGLE / MTP / draft models) run with simulated synthetic acceptance, with the acceptance-length value taken from the committed golden AL curve in golden_al_distribution/ for that model, thinking mode, and draft length. A submission may choose any supported draft length, but it may not substitute a different acceptance target.
  • Verified that the model architecture isn't changed with benchmark hacks like using --hf-overrides to skipping indexer for every x layers on models that don't natively support this. As a general rule, we won't accept optimizations that reduces the number of model architecture FLOPs. Anything that makes that same computation run faster is fair game; FLOPs at lower precisions is fine, given that the config passes private evals. As an general north star princple, we should only use optimizations which is used in production by customers that care about accuracy
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have verified that the respective vLLM submission made using upstream https://hub.docker.com/u/vllm docker repo, upstream SGLang https://hub.docker.com/u/lmsysorg docker repo. The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet as supported by vLLM/SGLang community maintainers
  • If an company claims that they support vLLM/SGLang as first class upstream in-tree LLM inference engines on their hardware, I have have verified that the respective vLLM/SGLang submission has been made before additional frameworks (TRT-LLM, ATOM, etc.). The only exceptions are for new hardware, such as MI455X UALoE72, Vera Rubin NVL72, Rubin NVL8, etc., and for new model architectures where there is an actual reason why vLLM/SGLang does not fundamentally support them yet.
  • Verified that every single-node vLLM/SGLang recipe in this PR is documented in the official vLLM recipes and/or the SGLang cookbook:
    • I linked the corresponding upstream PR in the vLLM recipe repo or SGLang repo and verified that it is MERGED before this InferenceX PR merges. An opened, draft, or closed-without-merge upstream PR does not satisfy this requirement. If the matching recipe was already published, I linked the published recipe/cookbook page in the additional detail section below.
  • Verified that this PR does not patch the inference engine or serving stack — the pinned image must run as shipped. This covers .patch files / git apply / patch, inline patches embedded in benchmark scripts (e.g. a python3/sed heredoc that rewrites installed engine sources before serving), in-place edits of site-packages, monkey-patching, overwriting container files, and installing forked/rebuilt engine wheels on top of the pinned image. The only exception is a patch covered by a filled-out waiver at docs/waiver/<PR_NUMBER>.md — named after the PR that introduces the patch and filed in that same PR, stating what is patched, why the unmodified upstream image cannot run this benchmark, the upstream PR/issue link, and the removal plan — which I have linked below in the additional detail section.
  • If any of the above criteria cannot reasonably be satisfied, I have provided additional reasoning below.

Additional detail section:

Signed: seungrokj

@Klaud-Cold

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

✅✅✅ Verdict: PASS ✅✅✅

This supersedes the earlier REJECTED assessment for this SHA, which reviewed a prior empty sign-off; the current sign-off (review by seungrokj) is fully filled and links published upstream documentation.

✅ Check 0 (CODEOWNER): PASS — seungrokj is a listed owner of configs/amd-master.yaml; the remaining changed paths carry only the catch-all owner.
✅ Check 1 (green sweep on in-PR commit): PASS — head 4aebb99 ran the full agentic sweep green (agentic / c1/c4/c8/c16 and agentic eval / all success, none skipped): run 30346826643. The generic single-node *//eval / lanes are skipped by design for an agentic-scenario config; the executed per-config jobs are the agentic ones.
✅ Check 2 (evals pass): PASS — GSM8K em_strict 0.951 ≥ the 0.90 bar (utils/evals/thresholds.yaml default; no minimaxm3 override), measured on amd/MiniMax-M3-MXFP4 fp4 TP4 conc16 using the PR's pinned image (vllm/vllm-openai-rocm:nightly-dcfebf93…).
✅ Check 3 (recipe linked, merged, matching): PASS — sign-off links the published recipe recipes.vllm.ai/MiniMaxAI/MiniMax-M3 (file merged on main of vllm-project/recipes), which documents the MXFP4/MI355X variant including an InferenceX MI355X sweep-reproduction command; all major args match (model, MI355X, TP4, MXFP4 + fp8 KV cache, --attention-backend TRITON_ATTN, --moe-backend aiter, --block-size 128, --language-model-only, --no-enable-prefix-caching, INT4 quick-reduce env). Informational only: the DRAM KV-offload lane flags (--kv_offloading_backend native, --kv_offloading_size) and harness knobs (--max-num-seqs, --gpu-memory-utilization) are InferenceX sweep-lane specifics (upstream agentic/kv-offload doc additionally pending in open vllm-project/recipes#631), and --reasoning-parser is intentionally omitted with a documented agentic-client rationale — neither changes the deployment-defining args.
✅ Check 4 (reuse command): PASS — /reuse-sweep-run posted by seungrokj (COLLABORATOR).
✅ Check 5 (latest checklist template): PASS — every item of the current docs/PR_REVIEW_CHECKLIST.md template is present and checked.
✅ Check 6 (upstream image / engine-first): PASS — vllm/vllm-openai-rocm:nightly-dcfebf93… is from the upstream vLLM Docker Hub org on an established SKU (MI355X); framework is vLLM itself, so engine-first ordering is satisfied.
✅ Check 7 (no architecture hacks): PASS — no --hf-overrides/model-config edits; --language-model-only only skips loading the vision encoder unused by this text-only workload (an upstream-documented recipe feature), leaving text-path FLOPs unchanged.
➖ Check 8 (spec-decode chat template): N/A — no speculative-decoding changes in this PR.
✅ Check 9 (no engine patches): PASS — the script installs only harness/client deps and runs the pinned image as shipped; no patching of the serving stack.
➖ Check 10 (agentic golden AL): N/A — agentic config without speculative decoding; no simulated-acceptance knobs present anywhere in the diff.

@seungrokj

seungrokj commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@functionstackx @Oseltamivir @cquil11 can you plz merge this ?
This run used "lm_eval" instead of "swebench"

@cquil11

cquil11 commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

/stage-results

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@cquil11 staged run 30346826643: https://inferencemax-app-git-staging-semianalysisai.vercel.app/inference?i_dates=2026-07-28~r30346826643

This shared staging slot remains available until the next /stage-results request. Staging workflow

@cquil11
cquil11 dismissed functionstackx’s stale review July 28, 2026 14:31

LMCache removed. Fixed.

@cquil11
cquil11 merged commit fbade41 into main Jul 28, 2026
86 of 106 checks passed
@cquil11
cquil11 deleted the amd/agentx-minimax-m3-vllm branch July 28, 2026 14:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

agentx AgentX benchmarks, recipes, and infrastructure AMD full-sweep-enabled

Projects

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants