[https://nvbugs/6474892][fix] Rename MTPEagleDynamicTreeWorker.forward → _forward_impl (signature unchanged…

[chenfeiz0326]

Summary

• Root cause: MTPEagleDynamicTreeWorker overrode SpecWorkerBase.forward, which SpecWorkerBase.init_subclass forbids, raising TypeError at import time and breaking pytest collection for every test importing tensorrt_llm.
• Fix: Rename MTPEagleDynamicTreeWorker.forward → _forward_impl (signature unchanged, compatible with base's *args/**kwargs dispatch); committed ONLY that source file to avoid the prior LFS-binary pollution.
• Automated fix generated by repair-bot

Test plan

• Verify fix on the same GPU type as the original failure
• Check for regressions in related tests

Links

• Bug: https://nvbugs/6474892

Dev Engineer Review

• Renamed MTPEagleDynamicTreeWorker.forward to _forward_impl without changing its signature or behavior.
• Resolves SpecWorkerBase.__init_subclass__ import-time validation failures and restores pytest collection.
• No configuration, test-list, or unrelated files were changed.

QA Engineer Review

No test changes.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

MTPEagleDynamicTreeWorker.forward(...) is renamed to _forward_impl(...); its parameters and implementation remain unchanged.

Changes

Dynamic tree execution

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Rename worker execution entry point tensorrt_llm/_torch/speculative/mtp_dynamic_tree.py	Renames the worker’s main execution method from forward to _forward_impl without changing its parameters or pipeline logic.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• NVIDIA/TensorRT-LLM#16724: Renames the same dynamic tree worker entry method.
• NVIDIA/TensorRT-LLM#16727: Applies the same forward to _forward_impl rename.
• NVIDIA/TensorRT-LLM#16728: Contains the same method-level change in mtp_dynamic_tree.py.

Suggested reviewers: sunnyqgg

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The description summarizes the fix and test plan, but it does not follow the required template and omits the PR Checklist section.	Rewrite it using the repository template with @coderabbitai summary, Description, Test Coverage, and PR Checklist sections.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title matches the change and follows the required ticket/type pattern.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}