remove unnecessary checks on convolution parameters

[xinyu-intel]

Description

Since dilate of 2-D convolution must be {1, 1}, remove some unnecessary code. @zheng-da

Checklist

Essentials

Please feel free to remove inapplicable items for your PR.

• The PR title starts with [MXNET-$JIRA_ID], where $JIRA_ID refers to the relevant JIRA issue created (except PRs with tiny changes)
• Changes are complete (i.e. I finished coding on this PR)
• All changes have test coverage:
• Unit tests are added for small changes to verify correctness (e.g. adding a new operator)
• Nightly tests are added for complicated/long-running ones (e.g. changing distributed kvstore)
• Build tests will be added for build configuration changes (e.g. adding a new build option with NCCL)
• Code is well-documented:
• For user-facing API changes, API doc string has been updated.
• For new C++ functions in header files, their functionalities and arguments are documented.
• For new examples, README.md is added to explain the what the example does, the source of the dataset, expected performance on test set and reference to the original paper if applicable
• Check the API doc at http://mxnet-ci-doc.s3-accelerate.dualstack.amazonaws.com/PR-$PR_ID/$BUILD_ID/index.html
• To the my best knowledge, examples are either not affected by this change, or have been fixed to be compatible with this change

Changes

• Feature1, tests, (and when applicable, API doc)
• Feature2, tests, (and when applicable, API doc)

Comments

• If this change is a backward incompatible change, why must this change be made.
• Interesting edge cases to note here

[xinyu-intel]

According to https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/blob/master/src/operator/nn/convolution.cc#L359, the dilate of 2-D conv has been set hard to (1,1). So CHECK_GE(param.dilate.ndim(), 2U) must be passed and param.dilate.ndim() can't be 0.

[pengzhao-intel]

@zheng-da @piiswrong tiny change to remove unnecessary code, please help take a review.

[zheng-da]

does the convolution has the same performance with and without dilation?
could you please also do the same for deconvolution?

[xinyu-intel]

ok, i'll have a try.

[eric-haibin-lin]

any update?

[lupesko]

@xinyu-intel @pengzhao-intel can you guys please follow up on the feedback so we can move this forward? Thanks!

[lupesko]

@xinyu-intel @pengzhao-intel bounce.

[xinyu-intel]

@lupesko Hi, can I close this pr first as this is just code refactor and low priority. Thanks!

[lupesko]

@xinyu-intel up to you - feel free to follow up or close. Thanks!
@mxnet-label-bot [pr-awaiting-response]