-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.9k
Reject Muon optimizer with reduce_scatter in ZeRO-1/2 #8090
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
Merged
delock
merged 2 commits into
deepspeedai:master
from
whycoming:fix/muon-zero12-reduce-scatter-guard
Jun 27, 2026
Merged
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This check treats every
MuonWithAuxAdaminstance as unsafe, but the ZeRO-1/2 whole-matrix Muon path is only taken for params/groups withuse_muon=Trueinget_flat_partition(). When users select themuonoptimizer for a model whose parameters are all excluded from Muon (for example embeddings/lm_head/1-D params) or pass aMuonWithAuxAdamwith all groups markeduse_muon=False, training falls back to the auxiliary Adam path, which is elementwise and compatible withreduce_scatter; becausereduce_scatterdefaults to true, those valid runs now fail during initialization. Gate the error on an activeuse_muongroup instead of the optimizer class alone.Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
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.
get_flat_partitiondoes gate the Newton-Schulz path onuse_muon, so strictly the hazard only exists when an active Muon group is present. I kept the condition asisinstance(MuonWithAuxAdam)here to mirror the merged ZeRO-3 guard (stage3.py, #7919), which uses the same check — so the two stages stay consistent, and it matches the conservative style of the existingreduce_scatterguards (e.g. the MoE assertion instage_1_and_2.py).The only configuration this over-rejects is a
MuonWithAuxAdamwhose groups are alluse_muon=False— i.e. selecting Muon for a model with no Muon-eligible 2-D params — which is degenerate, and the remedy (reduce_scatter: false) is identical to every other Muon run, so the practical cost is nil.If you'd prefer the precise gating (reject only when an active
use_muongroup exists), I'm happy to apply it to both ZeRO-1/2 and ZeRO-3 so they remain consistent — just let me know.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.
@whycoming I agree with you that there is no need for precise gating which would only complicate the mechanism. Besides. keeping zero1/2/3 with same behavior could avoid surprise when switch from zero 1/2 to zero3.