mirror of
https://github.com/esphome/esphome.git
synced 2026-08-31 18:16:03 +00:00
J. Nick Koston
7d12b984a8
Doc and test updates from a code review of this PR: - Correct the `tail_us == 0 on Phase A-only ticks` claim in the Application::loop() comment and the RuntimeStatsCollector::record_loop_active docstring. `loop_tail_start_us` is set to `loop_before_end_us`, and `loop_now_us` is sampled later, so `tail_us` on Phase A-only ticks is the small gate-check + record prefix — tiny but non-zero. (Also flagged by Copilot on application.h:623 and runtime_stats.h:45.) - Call out ESP8266 as the floor case in the WDT_FEED_INTERVAL_MS margin table. Its soft WDT (~1.6 s) is the tightest margin at ~5x, so future changes to the constant need to preserve comfortable headroom there. - Tighten the test lower bound at tests/integration/test_loop_interval_decoupling.py from `2 <= loop_delta <= 6` to `3 <= loop_delta <= 6`. Allowing 2 would let a >50% slowdown from the 4-in-2s nominal pass as CI jitter, which undermines the regression signal. 3 keeps the test honest while still absorbing realistic CI jitter. - Add a second integration test (test_loop_interval_default_not_pulled_forward) that covers the inverse direction: at the default loop_interval_ with a fast scheduler item (5 ms — well under the old delay_time/2 = 8 ms floor), the component phase must still run at ~62 Hz, not the pre-fix ~128 Hz. This locks down the original 128 Hz → 62 Hz regression that motivated the PR.
