make inverted belt path work with hybrid_corexy idex

[HelgeKeck]

This PR tries to fix an issue with an inverted belt path for hybrid_corexy Idex setups.

Thats the v-core idex belt path. It seems that it isnt possible atm to properly configure this situation with the current hybrid_corexy and dualcarriage implementation

If i configure the Toolhead stepper direction so that they move in the right direction, then they move diagonaly when moving just Y. If i invert the Y stepper direction then toolheads do move correctly in y, but then Y is inverted. Also tried to use mtor B for the X-carraige, same result.

Only way to make it somehow work is to put the dual carriage on the left side and the X carriage to the right side, but then i cant use Set Gcode offset anymore for the copy and mirror mode, only set kinematics helps then which results in a not working bed mesh leveling for the main toolhead

it would work if my toolheads would point into this direction

i dont know a lot about kinematic coding in klipper, but this change seems to work very well from what i can say from my first tests.

would be nice if someone could have a look and tell me if there are any sideeffects i can face with this kind of change.

thanks

[HelgeKeck]

just to be clear, i just used set kinematic position to make some simple moving tests, no homing or even printing has been done yet. i assume there is mch more to that than just chaning these two signs

[HelgeKeck]

not sure if its helpful, but homing X alone works, but if y is already homed, then the x-carriage doesnt stop on the second homing attempt after the homing retraction move

EDIT: It tries to make the retraction move in the wrong direction
EDIT: or it doesnt finish even the first homing attempt

[github-actions]

Thank you for your contribution to Klipper. Unfortunately, a reviewer has not assigned themselves to this GitHub Pull Request. All Pull Requests are reviewed before merging, and a reviewer will need to volunteer. Further information is available at: https://www.klipper3d.org/CONTRIBUTING.html

There are some steps that you can take now:

1. Perform a self-review of your Pull Request by following the steps at: https://www.klipper3d.org/CONTRIBUTING.html#what-to-expect-in-a-review
   If you have completed a self-review, be sure to state the results of that self-review explicitly in the Pull Request comments. A reviewer is more likely to participate if the bulk of a review has already been completed.
2. Consider opening a topic on the Klipper Discourse server to discuss this work. The Discourse server is a good place to discuss development ideas and to engage users interested in testing. Reviewers are more likely to prioritize Pull Requests with an active community of users.
3. Consider helping out reviewers by reviewing other Klipper Pull Requests. Taking the time to perform a careful and detailed review of others work is appreciated. Regular contributors are more likely to prioritize the contributions of other regular contributors.

Unfortunately, if a reviewer does not assign themselves to this GitHub Pull Request then it will be automatically closed. If this happens, then it is a good idea to move further discussion to the Klipper Discourse server. Reviewers can reach out on that forum to let you know if they are interested and when they are available.

Best regards,
~ Your friendly GitIssueBot

PS: I'm just an automated script, not a human being.

[github-actions]

Unfortunately a reviewer has not assigned themselves to this GitHub Pull Request and it is therefore being closed. It is a good idea to move further discussion to the Klipper Discourse server. Reviewers can reach out on that forum to let you know if they are interested and when they are available.

Best regards,
~ Your friendly GitIssueBot

PS: I'm just an automated script, not a human being.