-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
feat: add reasoning, reasoning_content, extra_content fields to OpenAI message types for v1/chat/completions
#4244
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
cdoern
wants to merge
2
commits into
llamastack:main
Choose a base branch
from
cdoern:completion
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+188
−1
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@cdoern can we get away by adding just the
reasoningfield? while we are doing this, can you think about how we should add Gemini-3's "encrypted thought summaries" field also?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah I can probably just use
reasoning, I can look into the gemini fieldThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hmmm actually @ashwinb ,
OpenAIChoiceDelta(used for streaming) already hasreasoning_content. so should we mimic that and support bothreasoningandreasoning_contentfor streaming/non-streaming?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
added support for thought_signatures b99eb2a
pulled this from gemini docs: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/thought-signatures
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We have a somewhat non-trivial decision to make here in terms of the API shape for reasoning. Gemini chooses
extra_contentto transport all new fields, whereas vLLM has clearly gone another way and used the fact that OpenAI's SDK uses "TypedDicts" which are amenable to adding sub-fields directly in other places (reasoning_content). I somewhat like vLLM's decision better and would rather add two sub-fields: (1)reasoningand (2)thought_signatureto both the streaming (ChunkDelta) and non-streaming (Chunk) fields.Do folks who have worked closer to inference have thoughts here @mattf @bbrowning?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah, I am fine with either approach here. One half-baked idea I have is that each provider could have a custom version of this class that extends it
vLLMOpenAIMessageParams(OpenAIMessageParams)or something and we could add custom content there somehow?the gemini docs outline their thought_signature support as:
so I wonder if this will work without
extra_content?