Re-add missing Growatt TLX values

[muppet3000]

Proposed change

• Re-adds missing values for the Growatt TLX types that were being registered through a different route.
  This implements the majority of the missing statistics to solve 90% of the ticket and get people working again.
  In the future the remaining 10% will be added as this is dependent on an upstream library change which will take longer to implement.
• Fixes parts of Growatt integration missing but basic entities #81470 - there will be more work in the future.

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 #
• This PR is related to issue: Growatt integration missing but basic entities #81470
• Link to documentation pull request:

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
• The code has been formatted using Black (black --fast 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]

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

Code owner commands

Code owners of growatt_server can trigger bot actions by commenting:

• @home-assistant close Closes the issue.
• @home-assistant rename Awesome new title Change the title of the issue.
• @home-assistant reopen Reopen the issue.
• @home-assistant unassign growatt_server Removes the current integration label and assignees on the issue, add the integration domain after the command.

[muppet3000]

I'm a bit confused about the failing coverage report, is this a new feature that has been added to PRs? I'm not sure how I'm supposed to add tests for the comment that I added ......

Also, this integration does not yet have tests written for the core sensor or the sensor types. Is it possible to get this approved and merged without the tests in the interests of re-instating the missing functionality and I can then follow up with a new PR to add test coverage to the rest of the integration in a separate PR?

[muppet3000]

Answered my own question, turns out there were a load of files missing from coveragerc, I plan to add the test cases in the future but for now the files have been excluded from the coverage checks.

[MartinHjelmare]

If you don't want to close an issue, take care what verbs you write before the issue link in the PR description. GitHub will automatically close issues that are prefixed with fixes, closes, and similar verbs in a PR description. I updated the PR description to remove the auto close connection for the issue.

[MartinHjelmare]

Maybe solve 3 by inheriting from RestoreSensor and restoring the last state when creating the entity?

core/homeassistant/components/sensor/__init__.py

Line 959 in 14ee3f1

class RestoreSensor(SensorEntity, RestoreEntity):

[muppet3000]

Thanks for the suggestion I'll look into how I can do this - I was wondering if there's a nice way of getting the previous value of an existing sensor, clearly there is!!

If it's ok with you, I'll look to implement this in a future PR rather than this one as I'd like to get this one merged as-is.

[MartinHjelmare]

Yes. 👍

[MartinHjelmare]

Thanks!