Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  1
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
  1. #11
    3D Printer Noob
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Post Thanks / Like


    I watched some Ender 3 YouTube videos that showed 29% of dynamic memory free, but I was seeing 92% for the CR-10. This was strange as they both use 128k Melzi boards.

    After comparing differences between CR-10 and Ender 3 configurations, I found that substantial dynamic memory is freed up when you disable SDCARD_SORT_ALPHA or reduce SDSORT_LIMIT from the default 256 to 10 and disable caching. I was now getting 29% free on CR-10.


    // SD Card Sorting options
    #define SDSORT_LIMIT 256 // Maximum number of sorted items (10-256). Costs 27 bytes each.
    #define FOLDER_SORTING -1 // -1=above 0=none 1=below
    #define SDSORT_GCODE false // Allow turning sorting on/off with LCD and M34 g-code.
    #define SDSORT_USES_RAM true // Pre-allocate a static array for faster pre-sorting.
    #define SDSORT_USES_STACK false // Prefer the stack for pre-sorting to give back some SRAM. (Negated by next 2 options.)
    #define SDSORT_CACHE_NAMES true // Keep sorted items in RAM longer for speedy performance. Most expensive option.
    #define SDSORT_DYNAMIC_RAM false // Use dynamic allocation (within SD menus). Least expensive option. Set SDSORT_LIMIT before use!
    #define SDSORT_CACHE_VFATS 2 // Maximum number of 13-byte VFAT entries to use for sorting.

    This seemed like a major breakthrough as I was finally able to successfully compile the firmware with power loss recovery enabled

    Started a test print, deliberately powered off, restarted, selected the option to resume print, but.......... the nozzle just crashed into the bed!

    Saw a few posts that said use 1.1.9 Bug Fix version. The problem is that there seems to be new bugs in the bug fix version that stop me from actually being able to print. (Prints start at y=0 position, off the bed).

    One step forward 2 steps back again.


  2. #12
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Post Thanks / Like
    There is a g-code for that. You can change the absolute value of zero.
    Someone should have put a routine together to make sure that zero is at a particular offset.

    I think you found a good sized array that no longer needed to have space allocated.

    Good luck on the next challenge



Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts