UMO / UMO+ Firmware
- LePaul
- Reactions:
- Posts: 3979
- Joined: February 7th, 2016, 10:26 pm
- Location: Bangor, Maine USA
- 3D Printer(s): 24 - Yes I have a problem!
- Contact:
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Wow, that's an old post you linked
- antiklesys
- Reactions:
- Posts: 183
- Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
- 3D Printer(s): UMO
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Found the issue, I had to go and change Marlin_main.cpp in the following way:
- for(int8_t i = 0; i < (int8_t)sizeof(sensitive_pins); i++)
+ for(uint8_t i = 0; i < (sizeof(sensitive_pins)/sizeof(sensitive_pins[0])); ++i)
This is a bug fix of: https://ultimaker.com/en/community/9683 ... ed-pwm-bug
Can we please have this added in this firmware?
- for(int8_t i = 0; i < (int8_t)sizeof(sensitive_pins); i++)
+ for(uint8_t i = 0; i < (sizeof(sensitive_pins)/sizeof(sensitive_pins[0])); ++i)
This is a bug fix of: https://ultimaker.com/en/community/9683 ... ed-pwm-bug
Can we please have this added in this firmware?
- Amedee
- Reactions:
- Posts: 599
- Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
- Location: Brussels, Belgium
- 3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
- Contact:
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Yep, good catch...
With the overrun you could have any pin blacklisted at random.
(Interesting BTW, that the FAN_PIN is in the blacklist array, while M42 handle the fan case )
I'll push that at the earliest opportunity
With the overrun you could have any pin blacklisted at random.
(Interesting BTW, that the FAN_PIN is in the blacklist array, while M42 handle the fan case )
I'll push that at the earliest opportunity
- drayson
- Reactions:
- Posts: 254
- Joined: February 15th, 2016, 5:04 am
- Location: Graz, Austria
- 3D Printer(s): UMO with mods :-)
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Great, thanks
- antiklesys
- Reactions:
- Posts: 183
- Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
- 3D Printer(s): UMO
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Hi Amedee,
Quick question for you specifically: does the marlin branch mentioned in this thread support this? https://ultimaker.com/en/community/8062 ... -board-fix
Quick question for you specifically: does the marlin branch mentioned in this thread support this? https://ultimaker.com/en/community/8062 ... -board-fix
- Amedee
- Reactions:
- Posts: 599
- Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
- Location: Brussels, Belgium
- 3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
- Contact:
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Not sure I get the question correctly...
My firmware fork fully support the 'Full Graphic Smart Controller', this is what I have on my UMO.
My firmware fork fully support the 'Full Graphic Smart Controller', this is what I have on my UMO.
- antiklesys
- Reactions:
- Posts: 183
- Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
- 3D Printer(s): UMO
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Thanks man for the confirmation!
Yes I saw your pics and it looks lovely!
Yes I saw your pics and it looks lovely!
- antiklesys
- Reactions:
- Posts: 183
- Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
- 3D Printer(s): UMO
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Just a quick question for you still: how did fix it to the UM? Do you have the files for a different holder?
- antiklesys
- Reactions:
- Posts: 183
- Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
- 3D Printer(s): UMO
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Hey Amedee,
Quick question for you here:
In configuration.h I defined the following:
#define REPRAP_DISCOUNT_FULL_GRAPHIC_SMART_CONTROLLER
However when compiling with Arduino IDE 1.06 it fails as I get the error:
'u8g_fntpgm_uint8_t' does not name a type
This refers to line:
const u8g_fntpgm_uint8_t u8g_font_6x9[2300] U8G_SECTION(".progmem.u8g_font_6x9") = {
in file: dogm_font_data_marlin.h
Any clues?
Quick question for you here:
In configuration.h I defined the following:
#define REPRAP_DISCOUNT_FULL_GRAPHIC_SMART_CONTROLLER
However when compiling with Arduino IDE 1.06 it fails as I get the error:
'u8g_fntpgm_uint8_t' does not name a type
This refers to line:
const u8g_fntpgm_uint8_t u8g_font_6x9[2300] U8G_SECTION(".progmem.u8g_font_6x9") = {
in file: dogm_font_data_marlin.h
Any clues?
- Amedee
- Reactions:
- Posts: 599
- Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
- Location: Brussels, Belgium
- 3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
- Contact:
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Did you install the U8g library? ( https://github.com/olikraus/u8glib )
- antiklesys
- Reactions:
- Posts: 183
- Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
- 3D Printer(s): UMO
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Yes, fixed now. Forgot to restart the ide after a manual installation of the library.
Noob me
Noob me
- antiklesys
- Reactions:
- Posts: 183
- Joined: February 13th, 2016, 8:01 am
- 3D Printer(s): UMO
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Currently trying to implement a bed leveling routine.
So far it failed, not sure if it's the M0 fault or something else.
Your thoughts?
https://github.com/Antiklesys/Marlin-1/ ... fd0ceb6efd
So far it failed, not sure if it's the M0 fault or something else.
Your thoughts?
https://github.com/Antiklesys/Marlin-1/ ... fd0ceb6efd
- Amedee
- Reactions:
- Posts: 599
- Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
- Location: Brussels, Belgium
- 3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
- Contact:
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
That won't work, you can't enqueue commands like that, the circular buffer is way to small
- Amedee
- Reactions:
- Posts: 599
- Joined: February 15th, 2016, 11:10 am
- Location: Brussels, Belgium
- 3D Printer(s): UMO / UMO+
- Contact:
Re: UMO / UMO+ Firmware
Since a couple of people started to make bad press around my builder in the UM forum, I decided to log the builds.
I am not looking at personal info, I just file the md5 hash of the build and the parameters. That way if somebody tells me it does not run, with the hash I can find back the parameters that were used for that particular build.
Now in less than a month (27 days to be precise) I have logged 150 builds
Of course it does not mean that all these firmware were actually installed, some people just try some options and leave, but the visibility is definitely higher than what I though...
From the web stats, the biggest 'referrer' is Neotko's article on the UM forum, and quite some people also follow the links where the builder is mentioned in the various UM forum threads.
Interesting...
I am not looking at personal info, I just file the md5 hash of the build and the parameters. That way if somebody tells me it does not run, with the hash I can find back the parameters that were used for that particular build.
Now in less than a month (27 days to be precise) I have logged 150 builds
Of course it does not mean that all these firmware were actually installed, some people just try some options and leave, but the visibility is definitely higher than what I though...
From the web stats, the biggest 'referrer' is Neotko's article on the UM forum, and quite some people also follow the links where the builder is mentioned in the various UM forum threads.
Interesting...