Fix BLTOUCH deploy/stow#14352
Merged
thinkyhead merged 2 commits intobugfix-2.0.xfrom Jun 21, 2019
unknown repository
Merged
Conversation
Author
|
By the way @thinkyhead sorry I goofed and when I put this in a new branch and deleted the other one, gihub closed the original PR which I had not intended. I clean up too much, it seems sigh. |
This was referenced Jun 21, 2019
Member
|
It's better if commit messages explicitly state what the change does rather than just giving the PR number. We need to be able to scan the commit log in terminals, text editors, and on web pages and see the changes without clicking away to other pages. |
thinkyhead
changed the title
ghost
deleted the
Author
|
@thinkyhead That title change is wrong, I think. |
thinkyhead
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 26, 2019
thinkyhead
changed the title
ghost
pushed a commit
to bfhobbes/Marlin
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 15, 2020
- Fixes MarlinFirmware#14328 - Originally MarlinFirmware#14352 - Reverted in 2580104
mathom
pushed a commit
to mathom/Marlin
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2020
- Fixes MarlinFirmware#14328 - Originally MarlinFirmware#14352 - Reverted in 2580104
jmp0x0000
pushed a commit
to jmp0x0000/Marlin
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2020
- Fixes MarlinFirmware#14328 - Originally MarlinFirmware#14352 - Reverted in 2580104
njibhu
pushed a commit
to njibhu/Marlin
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 24, 2020
- Fixes MarlinFirmware#14328 - Originally MarlinFirmware#14352 - Reverted in 2580104
HairingX
pushed a commit
to HairingX/Marlin
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2021
- Fixes MarlinFirmware#14328 - Originally MarlinFirmware#14352 - Reverted in 2580104
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
User reports that M401 and M402 do not work if BLTOUCH_HS_MODE is not enabled
Reference #14328
REPRODUCED, BUG IDENTIFIED and FIXED, TESTING finished
In probe.cpp, some cleanup work needed to be done.
BLTOUCH is a SUBSET of HAS_Z_SERVO_PROBE
The only caveat at the moment, is that in SLOW_MODE (or normal mode) (i.e. BLTOUCH_HS_MODE disabled) the first BLTOUCH discrete DEPLOY action before a probe move and the last BLTOUCH discrete STOW action after a probe move are effectively done twice, once by the discrete action and once be the DEPLOY or STOW macro in the calling routine. After testing this, it is not detrimental.
As users will increasingly be migrating to BLTOUCH_HS_MODE, the old discrete DEPLOY and STOW actions can be phased out in the next mid-range time frame anyway.
probe.cpp is a bit cleaner now and getting closer to the way it should look.
Note that this commit does NOT fix the 2cond part of #14328 (title has been updated, issue still open) or even imply that it was reproduced yet.