Mihai

I'm coming from #27013 where this issue was mentioned. There, I also noticed the potential for the `MINIMAL_STEP_RATE` bound to cause issues (and I saw some "weird trapezoid outputs", though...

> But if the planner ended up planning a move at the integer-truncated speed then there would be a slight difference between the planned speed and the speed that results...

Only with #27035 submitted it is possible to safely remove the MINIMAL_STEP_RATE of 120 for `initial/final_rate` which is why removing it should be left as part of it.

> > Only with #27035 submitted it is possible to safely remove the `MINIMAL_STEP_RATE` of 120 for initial/final_rate which is why removing it should be left as part of it....

From the other discussion: > > Is there any reason to delay merging #26881? > > No, there isn't. It could be improved further but it's better as it is...

> @mh-dm Can you pull the `min_entry_speed_sqr` change out of #27035 and submit it as a standalone PR? I think that would work. Then it can be merged first, followed...

@XDA-Bam Thank you for trying it and finding that bug. It was due `filename_scroll_hash` which wasn't getting updated when moving from a non-file to a file entry. So if you...

This small patch has been on my printer with no issues and no wrong print starts for the last two months. Including folks @dbuezas @thinkyhead that are involved in somewhat...

Synced and retested. Ready to be merged.

@thisiskeithb Sorry if you're not the right person but can you please help get this fix PR a review?