Fix Starlink integration startup issue

[Fexiven]

fixes #114353

It seems async.gather doesn't work right with async_add_executor_job

Breaking change

Proposed change

Type of change

• Dependency upgrade
• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New integration (thank you!)
• New feature (which adds functionality to an existing integration)
• Deprecation (breaking change to happen in the future)
• Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
• Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

• This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes Can't start Starlink integration #114353

Checklist

• The code change is tested and works locally.
• Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
• There is no commented out code in this PR.
• I have followed the development checklist
• I have followed the perfect PR recommendations
• The code has been formatted using Ruff (ruff format homeassistant tests)
• Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:

• Documentation added/updated for www.home-assistant.io

If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:

• The manifest file has all fields filled out correctly.
  Updated and included derived files by running: python3 -m script.hassfest.
• New or updated dependencies have been added to requirements_all.txt.
  Updated by running python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all.
• For the updated dependencies - a link to the changelog, or at minimum a diff between library versions is added to the PR description.
• Untested files have been added to .coveragerc.

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

• I have reviewed two other open pull requests in this repository.

[home-assistant]

Hi @Fexiven

It seems you haven't yet signed a CLA. Please do so here.

Once you do that we will be able to review and accept this pull request.

Thanks!

[home-assistant]

Please take a look at the requested changes, and use the Ready for review button when you are done, thanks 👍

Learn more about our pull request process.

[home-assistant]

Hey there @boswelja, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (starlink) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!

Code owner commands

Code owners of starlink can trigger bot actions by commenting:

• @home-assistant close Closes the pull request.
• @home-assistant rename Awesome new title Renames the pull request.
• @home-assistant reopen Reopen the pull request.
• @home-assistant unassign starlink Removes the current integration label and assignees on the pull request, add the integration domain after the command.
• @home-assistant add-label needs-more-information Add a label (needs-more-information, problem in dependency, problem in custom component) to the pull request.
• @home-assistant remove-label needs-more-information Remove a label (needs-more-information, problem in dependency, problem in custom component) on the pull request.

Stale

[frenck]

@Fexiven Can you please update the PR title to be descriptive? Thanks! 👍

[boswelja]

Are we sure removing the parallelism here is the only solution?

[Fexiven]

removing the parallelism here is the only solution?

I've tried a few things to make it parallel, but every time I tried something else, it broke. Maybe someone else is more python affine to do it?

[boswelja]

more python affine to do it?

That's not me 😆 I think we can merge this as a workaround, I will open an issue to track the work later.

[frenck]

Thanks, @Fexiven 👍

../Frenck

[MartinHjelmare]

Please address the comment in a new PR. Thanks!

[MartinHjelmare]

Instead of scheduling three executor jobs sequentially, we should rewrite this to just schedule one executor job and do all the sync work in a single function. Create a function that calls status_data, location_data and get_sleep_config and schedule the function once on the executor.

[MartinHjelmare]

I commented this on the previous PR two weeks ago:
#103057 (comment)