Fix Starlink's ever updating uptime #155574
Conversation
home-assistant
bot
added
bugfix
cla-signed
Hacktoberfest
has-tests
integration: starlink
labels
|
Hey there @boswelja, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration ( Code owner commandsCode owners of
|
Signed-off-by: David Rapan <[email protected]>
davidrapan
force-pushed
the
dev-starlink_last_restart
branch
from
69308fb to
513cc2a
Compare
davidrapan
changed the title
*This shoud ensure 100% fix Signed-off-by: David Rapan <[email protected]>
davidrapan
force-pushed
the
dev-starlink_last_restart
branch
from
b924242 to
118dbab
Compare
davidrapan
changed the title
Signed-off-by: David Rapan <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Rapan <[email protected]>
davidrapan
force-pushed
the
dev-starlink_last_restart
branch
from
a7bf312 to
c1fa9b9
Compare
|
Please take a look at the requested changes, and use the Ready for review button when you are done, thanks 👍 |
Signed-off-by: David Rapan <[email protected]>
| async def test_last_restart_state(hass: HomeAssistant) -> None: | ||
| """Test Starlink last restart state.""" | ||
| entry = MockConfigEntry( | ||
| domain=DOMAIN, | ||
| data={CONF_IP_ADDRESS: "1.2.3.4:0000"}, | ||
| ) | ||
| entity_id = "sensor.starlink_last_restart" | ||
|
|
||
| with ( | ||
| LOCATION_DATA_SUCCESS_PATCHER, | ||
| SLEEP_DATA_SUCCESS_PATCHER, | ||
| STATUS_DATA_SUCCESS_PATCHER, | ||
| HISTORY_STATS_SUCCESS_PATCHER, | ||
| patch( | ||
| "homeassistant.components.starlink.sensor.now", | ||
| return_value=datetime.fromisoformat("2025-10-22T13:31:29+00:00"), | ||
| ), | ||
| ): | ||
| entry.add_to_hass(hass) | ||
|
|
||
| await hass.config_entries.async_setup(entry.entry_id) | ||
| await hass.async_block_till_done() | ||
|
|
||
| assert entry.runtime_data | ||
| assert entry.runtime_data.data | ||
| assert entry.runtime_data.data.status["uptime"] == 804138 | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh right, forgot to tell about the tests.
Ideally we don't touch internals like runtime_data. Also, we shouldn't patch now, and instead use the freezer. I have been playing around this for a little bit to refactor this test to use it, but I didn't have much luck, but that'd be nice if we could have that
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I kinda wasn't able to make the tests work so this was some sort of a last resort. :) But maybe now we don't need to test it as a sensor and simply test the method?
BTW, I wasn't aware of the ignore_variance wrapper, this is certainly better. 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In a way I think having the test test the sensor is best as that's eventually what the user will see, so testing only the method makes it a bit more fragile
There was a problem hiding this comment.
678c4dd is the only way I managed to get it working.
Signed-off-by: David Rapan <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David Rapan <[email protected]>
4 participants
Proposed change
Use
ignore_varianceto compare new value against last one w/ 1 minute invariance, so we fix log spam:Type of change
Additional information
Checklist
ruff format homeassistant tests)If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:
If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:
Updated and included derived files by running:
python3 -m script.hassfest.requirements_all.txt.Updated by running
python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all.To help with the load of incoming pull requests: