[Core] Rename PassConfig flags as per RFC #27995

[arpitkh101]

Purpose

Implements the PassConfig flag renaming from issue #27995.

Changes:

• Renamed all PassConfig flags to be more descriptive (e.g., enable_fusion → fuse_norm_quant + fuse_act_quant)
• Added deprecation warnings for old flag names
• Old flags still work for backward compatibility
• Updated all internal code and tests to use new names

[github-actions]

👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM project.

💬 Join our developer Slack at https://slack.vllm.ai to discuss your PR in #pr-reviews, coordinate on features in #feat- channels, or join special interest groups in #sig- channels.

Just a reminder: PRs would not trigger full CI run by default. Instead, it would only run fastcheck CI which starts running only a small and essential subset of CI tests to quickly catch errors.

You ask your reviewers to trigger select CI tests on top of fastcheck CI.

Once the PR is approved and ready to go, your PR reviewer(s) can run CI to test the changes comprehensively before merging.

To run CI, PR reviewers can either: Add ready label to the PR or enable auto-merge.

If you have any questions, please reach out to us on Slack at https://slack.vllm.ai.

🚀

[mergify]

This pull request has merge conflicts that must be resolved before it can be
merged. Please rebase the PR, @arpitkh101.

https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/working-with-forks/syncing-a-fork

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request refactors PassConfig flags to be more descriptive, which is a great improvement for clarity. The changes are mostly mechanical renames across the test suite and configuration files. However, I've found a critical issue in the backward compatibility logic for the deprecated flags in vllm/config/compilation.py. The current implementation incorrectly handles cases where old flags are set to False, which would unintentionally enable features. I've provided a suggestion to fix this to ensure correct behavior.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[ProExpertProg]

A few minor notes, looks ready otherwise! Could you also add a test that checks that specifying the old fields results in new fields set correctly and a warning (see #29557 for example)

[ProExpertProg]

@arpitkh101 will you be able to finish this today so we can include it in the 0.12.0 release?

[hmellor]

@arpitkh101 will you be able to finish this today so we can include it in the 0.12.0 release?

If not, we should bump the removal version. Deprecation messges must be present for a whole minor version.

[arpitkh101]

I think I'll be able to push these changes today.

[ProExpertProg]

I think I'll be able to push these changes today.

@arpitkh101 please keep us posted! Someone else can pick up and help if you're not able to finish today, would really like to get this in for this release!

[hmellor]

Couple of nits, not necessary for the release but would be nice to clean up asap.