# What does this PR do?
Mainly tried to cover the entire llama_stack/apis directory, we only
have one left. Some excludes were just noop.
Signed-off-by: Sébastien Han <seb@redhat.com>
# What does this PR do?
- Update `/eval-tasks` to `/benchmarks`
- ⚠️ Remove differentiation between `app` v.s. `benchmark` eval task
config. Now we only have `BenchmarkConfig`. The overloaded `benchmark`
is confusing and do not add any value. Backward compatibility is being
kept as the "type" is not being used anywhere.
[//]: # (If resolving an issue, uncomment and update the line below)
[//]: # (Closes #[issue-number])
## Test Plan
- This change is backward compatible
- Run notebook test with
```
pytest -v -s --nbval-lax ./docs/getting_started.ipynb
pytest -v -s --nbval-lax ./docs/notebooks/Llama_Stack_Benchmark_Evals.ipynb
```
<img width="846" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d2fc06a7-593a-444f-bc1f-10ab9b0c843d"
/>
[//]: # (## Documentation)
[//]: # (- [ ] Added a Changelog entry if the change is significant)
---------
Signed-off-by: Ihar Hrachyshka <ihar.hrachyshka@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Browning <bbrownin@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Sébastien Han <seb@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: reidliu <reid201711@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ihar Hrachyshka <ihar.hrachyshka@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ben Browning <ben324@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Sébastien Han <seb@redhat.com>
Co-authored-by: Reid <61492567+reidliu41@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: reidliu <reid201711@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Yuan Tang <terrytangyuan@gmail.com>
Lint check in main branch is failing. This fixes the lint check after we
moved to ruff in https://github.com/meta-llama/llama-stack/pull/921. We
need to move to a `ruff.toml` file as well as fixing and ignoring some
additional checks.
Signed-off-by: Yuan Tang <terrytangyuan@gmail.com>
We desperately need to document our APIs. This is the basic requirement
of having a Spec :)
This PR updates the OpenAPI generator so documentation for request
parameters and object fields can be properly added to the OpenAPI specs.
From there, this should get picked by Stainless, etc.
## Test Plan:
Updated client-sdk (See
https://github.com/meta-llama/llama-stack-client-python/pull/104) and
then ran:
```bash
cd tests/client-sdk
LLAMA_STACK_CONFIG=../../llama_stack/templates/fireworks/run.yaml pytest -s -v inference/test_inference.py agents/test_agents.py
```
See https://github.com/meta-llama/llama-stack/issues/827 for the broader
design.
This is the first part:
- delete other kinds of memory banks (keyvalue, keyword, graph) for now;
we will introduce a keyvalue store API as part of this design but not
use it in the RAG tool yet.
- renaming of the APIs
# 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.
* 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>
