# What does this PR do?
This PR kills the notion of "pure passthrough" remote providers. You
cannot specify a single provider you must specify a whole distribution
(stack) as remote.
This PR also significantly fixes / upgrades testing infrastructure so
you can now test against a remotely hosted stack server by just doing
```bash
pytest -s -v -m remote test_agents.py \
--inference-model=Llama3.1-8B-Instruct --safety-shield=Llama-Guard-3-1B \
--env REMOTE_STACK_URL=http://localhost:5001
```
Also fixed `test_agents_persistence.py` (which was broken) and killed
some deprecated testing functions.
## Test Plan
All the tests.
# What does this PR do?
This PR kills the notion of "ShieldType". The impetus for this is the
realization:
> Why is keyword llama-guard appearing so many times everywhere,
sometimes with hyphens, sometimes with underscores?
Now that we have a notion of "provider specific resource identifiers"
and "user specific aliases" for those and the fact that this works with
models ("Llama3.1-8B-Instruct" <> "fireworks/llama-3pv1-..."), we can
follow the same rules for Shields.
So each Safety provider can make up a notion of identifiers it has
registered. This already happens with Bedrock correctly. We just
generalize it for Llama Guard, Prompt Guard, etc.
For Llama Guard, we further simplify by just adopting the underlying
model name itself as the identifier! No confusion necessary.
While doing this, I noticed a bug in our DistributionRegistry where we
weren't scoping identifiers by type. Fixed.
## Feature/Issue validation/testing/test plan
Ran (inference, safety, memory, agents) tests with ollama and fireworks
providers.
# What does this PR do?
This is a follow-up to #425. That PR allows for specifying models in the
registry, but each entry needs to look like:
```yaml
- identifier: ...
provider_id: ...
provider_resource_identifier: ...
```
This is headache-inducing.
The current PR makes this situation better by adopting the shape of our
APIs. Namely, we need the user to only specify `model-id`. The rest
should be optional and figured out by the Stack. You can always override
it.
Here's what example `ollama` "full stack" registry looks like (we still
need to kill or simplify shield_type crap):
```yaml
models:
- model_id: Llama3.2-3B-Instruct
- model_id: Llama-Guard-3-1B
shields:
- shield_id: llama_guard
shield_type: llama_guard
```
## Test Plan
See test plan for #425. Re-ran it.
# What does this PR do?
This PR brings back the facility to not force registration of resources
onto the user. This is not just annoying but actually not feasible
sometimes. For example, you may have a Stack which boots up with private
providers for inference for models A and B. There is no way for the user
to actually know which model is being served by these providers now (to
be able to register it.)
How will this avoid the users needing to do registration? In a follow-up
diff, I will make sure I update the sample run.yaml files so they list
the models served by the distributions explicitly. So when users do
`llama stack build --template <...>` and run it, their distributions
come up with the right set of models they expect.
For self-hosted distributions, it also allows us to have a place to
explicit list the models that need to be served to make the "complete"
stack (including safety, e.g.)
## Test Plan
Started ollama locally with two lightweight models: Llama3.2-3B-Instruct
and Llama-Guard-3-1B.
Updated all the tests including agents. Here's the tests I ran so far:
```bash
pytest -s -v -m "fireworks and llama_3b" test_text_inference.py::TestInference \
--env FIREWORKS_API_KEY=...
pytest -s -v -m "ollama and llama_3b" test_text_inference.py::TestInference
pytest -s -v -m ollama test_safety.py
pytest -s -v -m faiss test_memory.py
pytest -s -v -m ollama test_agents.py \
--inference-model=Llama3.2-3B-Instruct --safety-model=Llama-Guard-3-1B
```
Found a few bugs here and there pre-existing that these test runs fixed.
