Use negative crop coordinates when building SDXL negative time ids

[Devam0311]

Issue link: this addresses Issue 2 of #13610.
I have deliberately not used a Fixes keyword: #13610 tracks 7 separate findings, so a closing keyword would close it as soon as this one merges while the others are still open. Happy for the no-issue-needed label to be applied, or I can add a closing keyword if you would rather the review issue be closed and reopened.

What does this PR do?

Fixes Issue 2 of #13610 (stable_diffusion_xl model/pipeline review).

_get_add_time_ids accepts negative_crops_coords_top_left, and the aesthetic-score branch uses it — but the other branch does not:

if self.config.requires_aesthetics_score:
    add_neg_time_ids = list(negative_original_size + negative_crops_coords_top_left + (negative_aesthetic_score,))
else:
    add_neg_time_ids = list(negative_original_size + crops_coords_top_left + negative_target_size)
    #                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ positive coordinates

So anyone requesting different positive and negative crop conditioning silently gets the positive crop coordinates on both branches, and negative micro-conditioning is wrong.

Reproduced on main with the script from the issue:

negative time ids: [[32.0, 32.0, 1.0, 2.0, 32.0, 32.0]]   # 1, 2 are the POSITIVE crops
after fix:         [[32.0, 32.0, 9.0, 10.0, 32.0, 32.0]]  # 9, 10 as requested

Solution

Use negative_crops_coords_top_left, matching the aesthetic-score branch directly above it and the separate negative _get_add_time_ids call the text-to-image pipeline already makes.

The issue names three files. Five more carry this method through # Copied from, and utils/check_copies.py requires them to match, so all eight are updated together:

named in the issue	pipeline_stable_diffusion_xl_img2img.py, pipeline_stable_diffusion_xl_inpaint.py, modular_pipelines/stable_diffusion_xl/before_denoise.py
# Copied from the above	pipeline_controlnet_sd_xl_img2img.py, pipeline_controlnet_union_sd_xl_img2img.py, pipeline_pag_controlnet_sd_xl_img2img.py, pipeline_pag_sd_xl_img2img.py, pipeline_pag_sd_xl_inpaint.py

Testing

test_get_add_time_ids_uses_negative_crops_coords_top_left asserts the negative time ids carry the negative crop coordinates.

It drives the method through a lightweight stand-in rather than the dummy pipeline, as the issue's own reproduction does. The reason is concrete: this branch emits six time ids instead of five, and the dummy UNet's add_embedding.linear_1 is sized for the five-value aesthetic-score layout, so the real dummy pipeline raises on the embedding-dimension check before reaching the logic under test.

Verified it catches the bug: with the fix reverted it fails.

pytest tests/pipelines/stable_diffusion_xl/{img2img,inpaint} -k "not ip_adapter"
  -> 74 passed, 43 skipped
ruff check / ruff format --check   -> clean
git diff --check                   -> clean

Two sets of pre-existing failures in my environment, both reproducing identically on a clean checkout of main and unrelated to this change: the TestStableDiffusionXL*PipelineIPAdapter classes (a ModuleNotFoundError from an optional dependency I don't have installed), and one before_denoise.py _get_add_time_ids copy mismatch against StableDiffusionXLPipeline — a different method from the one changed here.

Before submitting

• Did you use an AI agent (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, etc.) to help with this PR? If so:
  • Did you read the Coding with AI agents guide?
  • Did you run the self-review skill on the diff?
  • Did you share the final self-review notes in the PR description or a comment?
• Did you read the contributor guideline?
• Was this discussed/approved via a GitHub issue? — stable_diffusion_xl model/pipeline review #13610
• Did you write any new necessary tests?

Self-review notes

Reviewed against .ai/references/review-rules.md and pipelines.md. No blocking issues.

For the reviewer:

1. This changes generated output for anyone who passes negative_crops_coords_top_left on a non-aesthetic-score model. That is the point — the old output ignored the argument — but it will move pinned outputs for those callers.
2. The blast radius is eight files, not the three the issue lists. That is forced by # Copied from; touching only the three would break check_copies. Happy to split the copies into a follow-up if you'd rather review them separately.
3. Scope kept to Issue 2. The other six issues in stable_diffusion_xl model/pipeline review #13610 are untouched.

Who can review?

@yiyixuxu @asomoza @hlky

[github-actions]

Hi @Devam0311, thanks for the PR! It does not appear to link an issue it fixes. If this PR addresses an existing issue, please add a closing keyword (e.g. Fixes #1234) to the PR description so the issue is linked. See the contribution guide for more details. If this PR intentionally does not fix a tracked issue, a maintainer can add the no-issue-needed label to silence this reminder.

Please note that PRs without a linked issue are likely to be automatically closed 10 days after this notice.

Once the PR links an issue (or gets the no-issue-needed label), you can ignore this message — it stays here as a comment, but it no longer applies.