Add reproduction test case for incorrect slice rewrite and add potential fix

[sebimarkgraf]

This adds a reproduction of the rule introduced in f42c2bb leading to an incorrect rewrite of the graph.

The original rule does not consider the step parameter, which can influence the result of a Slice to be the identity even when input and output shape are equivalent.

The potential fix seems to be to not apply the rule on step != 1, therefore the second commit adds this to the original rule implementation.

[sebimarkgraf]

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

[gramalingam]

Thanks for catching this!

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 70.08%. Comparing base (41c5dd5) to head (6584bcc).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2478      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   70.06%   70.08%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         212      212              
  Lines       25638    25646       +8     
  Branches     2572     2573       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits        17964    17975      +11     
+ Misses       6783     6781       -2     
+ Partials      891      890       -1     

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

[justinchuby]

Could you format the code with lintrunner f?

[sebimarkgraf]

Ran lintrunner f.
I am getting a Could not find a lintrunner config at: '.lintrunner.private.toml'., not sure if that is expected.

[justinchuby]

Ran lintrunner f. I am getting a Could not find a lintrunner config at: '.lintrunner.private.toml'., not sure if that is expected.

That’s expected. Thanks