# What does this PR do?
- `schema` should not a field w/ pydantic warnings
- change `schema` to `dataset_schema`
<img width="855" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/47cb6bb9-4be0-46a5-8701-24d24e2eaabd">
## Test Plan
```
pytest -v -s -m meta_reference_eval_together_inference_huggingface_datasetio eval/test_eval.py
```
## Before submitting
- [ ] This PR fixes a typo or improves the docs (you can dismiss the
other checks if that's the case).
- [ ] Ran pre-commit to handle lint / formatting issues.
- [ ] Read the [contributor
guideline](https://github.com/meta-llama/llama-stack/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md),
Pull Request section?
- [ ] Updated relevant documentation.
- [ ] Wrote necessary unit or integration tests.
# 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.
This PR changes the way model id gets translated to the final model name
that gets passed through the provider.
Major changes include:
1) Providers are responsible for registering an object and as part of
the registration returning the object with the correct provider specific
name of the model provider_resource_id
2) To help with the common look ups different names a new ModelLookup
class is created.
Tested all inference providers including together, fireworks, vllm,
ollama, meta reference and bedrock
# 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.
* migrate evals to resource
* remove listing of providers's evals
* change the order of params in register
* fix after rebase
* linter fix
---------
Co-authored-by: Dinesh Yeduguru <dineshyv@fb.com>
* migrate dataset to resource
* remove auto discovery
* remove listing of providers's datasets
* fix after rebase
---------
Co-authored-by: Dinesh Yeduguru <dineshyv@fb.com>
* init
* working bedrock tests
* bedrock test for inference fixes
* use env vars for bedrock guardrail vars
* add register in meta reference
* use correct shield impl in meta ref
* dont add together fixture
* right naming
* minor updates
* improved registration flow
* address feedback
---------
Co-authored-by: Dinesh Yeduguru <dineshyv@fb.com>
* Significantly simpler and malleable test setup
* convert memory tests
* refactor fixtures and add support for composable fixtures
* Fix memory to use the newer fixture organization
* Get agents tests working
* Safety tests work
* yet another refactor to make this more general
now it accepts --inference-model, --safety-model options also
* get multiple providers working for meta-reference (for inference + safety)
* Add README.md
---------
Co-authored-by: Ashwin Bharambe <ashwin@meta.com>
* persist registered objects with distribution
* linter fixes
* comment
* use annotate and field discriminator
* workign tests
* donot use global state
* precommit failures fixed
* add back Any
* fix imports
* remove unnecessary changes in ollama
* precommit failures fixed
* make kvstore configurable for dist and rename registry
* add comment about registry list return
* fix linter errors
* use registry to hydrate
* remove debug print
* linter fixes
* remove kvstore.db
* rename distribution_registry_store
---------
Co-authored-by: Dinesh Yeduguru <dineshyv@fb.com>
This PR makes several core changes to the developer experience surrounding Llama Stack.
Background: PR #92 introduced the notion of "routing" to the Llama Stack. It introduces three object types: (1) models, (2) shields and (3) memory banks. Each of these objects can be associated with a distinct provider. So you can get model A to be inferenced locally while model B, C can be inference remotely (e.g.)
However, this had a few drawbacks:
you could not address the provider instances -- i.e., if you configured "meta-reference" with a given model, you could not assign an identifier to this instance which you could re-use later.
the above meant that you could not register a "routing_key" (e.g. model) dynamically and say "please use this existing provider I have already configured" for a new model.
the terms "routing_table" and "routing_key" were exposed directly to the user. in my view, this is way too much overhead for a new user (which almost everyone is.) people come to the stack wanting to do ML and encounter a completely unexpected term.
What this PR does: This PR structures the run config with only a single prominent key:
- providers
Providers are instances of configured provider types. Here's an example which shows two instances of the remote::tgi provider which are serving two different models.
providers:
inference:
- provider_id: foo
provider_type: remote::tgi
config: { ... }
- provider_id: bar
provider_type: remote::tgi
config: { ... }
Secondly, the PR adds dynamic registration of { models | shields | memory_banks } to the API surface. The distribution still acts like a "routing table" (as previously) except that it asks the backing providers for a listing of these objects. For example it asks a TGI or Ollama inference adapter what models it is serving. Only the models that are being actually served can be requested by the user for inference. Otherwise, the Stack server will throw an error.
When dynamically registering these objects, you can use the provider IDs shown above. Info about providers can be obtained using the Api.inspect set of endpoints (/providers, /routes, etc.)
The above examples shows the correspondence between inference providers and models registry items. Things work similarly for the safety <=> shields and memory <=> memory_banks pairs.
Registry: This PR also makes it so that Providers need to implement additional methods for registering and listing objects. For example, each Inference provider is now expected to implement the ModelsProtocolPrivate protocol (naming is not great!) which consists of two methods
register_model
list_models
The goal is to inform the provider that a certain model needs to be supported so the provider can make any relevant backend changes if needed (or throw an error if the model cannot be supported.)
There are many other cleanups included some of which are detailed in a follow-up comment.
Test Plan:
First, start a TGI container with `meta-llama/Llama-Guard-3-8B` model
serving on port 5099. See https://github.com/meta-llama/llama-stack/pull/53 and its
description for how.
Then run llama-stack with the following run config:
```
image_name: safety
docker_image: null
conda_env: safety
apis_to_serve:
- models
- inference
- shields
- safety
api_providers:
inference:
providers:
- remote::tgi
safety:
providers:
- meta-reference
telemetry:
provider_id: meta-reference
config: {}
routing_table:
inference:
- provider_id: remote::tgi
config:
url: http://localhost:5099
api_token: null
hf_endpoint_name: null
routing_key: Llama-Guard-3-8B
safety:
- provider_id: meta-reference
config:
llama_guard_shield:
model: Llama-Guard-3-8B
excluded_categories: []
disable_input_check: false
disable_output_check: false
prompt_guard_shield: null
routing_key: llama_guard
```
Now simply run `python -m llama_stack.apis.safety.client localhost
<port>` and check that the llama_guard shield calls run correctly. (The
injection_shield calls fail as expected since we have not set up a
router for them.)
This is yet another of those large PRs (hopefully we will have less and less of them as things mature fast). This one introduces substantial improvements and some simplifications to the stack.
Most important bits:
* Agents reference implementation now has support for session / turn persistence. The default implementation uses sqlite but there's also support for using Redis.
* We have re-architected the structure of the Stack APIs to allow for more flexible routing. The motivating use cases are:
- routing model A to ollama and model B to a remote provider like Together
- routing shield A to local impl while shield B to a remote provider like Bedrock
- routing a vector memory bank to Weaviate while routing a keyvalue memory bank to Redis
* Support for provider specific parameters to be passed from the clients. A client can pass data using `x_llamastack_provider_data` parameter which can be type-checked and provided to the Adapter implementations.
