[Misc] Refacotr prepare_reqs

[wangxiyuan]

Before do more refactor, we should make execute_model more readable.

• vLLM version: v0.10.0
• vLLM main: vllm-project/vllm@78077d5

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request refactors the execute_model method to improve readability by splitting the large _process_reqs method into _prepare_inputs and _execute_model. This is a good change that makes the code easier to follow. The logic seems to be preserved correctly after the refactoring. I've found one issue with an outdated type hint that should be addressed. Also, there is a small typo in the pull request title ('Refacotr' should be 'Refactor').

[gemini-code-assist]

The return type hint for this function is outdated after the refactoring and no longer matches the actual returned values. Please update it to reflect the new return signature.

Suggested change

	) -> tuple[Union[AscendMetadata, AscendMLAMetadata,
	AscendTorchairMetadata], torch.Tensor, SpecDecodeMetadata,
	torch.Tensor, int, torch.Tensor, torch.Tensor, np.ndarray,
	Optional[set[str]], Optional[set[str]]]:
	) -> tuple[Union[AscendMetadata, AscendMLAMetadata,
	AscendTorchairMetadata], torch.Tensor, np.ndarray, int,
	Optional[torch.Tensor], bool, Optional[torch.Tensor],
	Optional[torch.Tensor], np.ndarray]:

[github-actions]

👋 Hi! Thank you for contributing to the vLLM Ascend project. The following points will speed up your PR merge:‌‌

• A PR should do only one thing, smaller PRs enable faster reviews.
• Every PR should include unit tests and end-to-end tests ‌to ensure it works and is not broken by other future PRs.
• Write the commit message by fulfilling the PR description to help reviewer and future developers understand.

If CI fails, you can run linting and testing checks locally according Contributing and Testing.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 76.35%. Comparing base (1a70564) to head (5fcb122).
⚠️ Report is 22 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2335   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   76.35%   76.35%           
=======================================
  Files         117      117           
  Lines       13371    13371           
=======================================
  Hits        10209    10209           
  Misses       3162     3162           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	76.35% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[github-actions]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.