glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 e498dd4c1c
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m53s
SAFETY-25: pin the claim-source set, so the tripwire is one
The durability claim this PR shipped was FALSE, and the reviewer of #31
disproved it by building the fix. Part 10 said, in four committed places,
that it "goes RED the day a loop-side floor is built, so the exposure
cannot change size under a green suite". The reviewer implemented the
memo's own recommended Option B in main.py - a
`Claim.limit("reserve", P_LOOP, hi=0.0)` filed under a `loop_soc_floor` -
and the ENTIRE SUITE STAYED GREEN. Part 10 green. Mutation 13 went on
printing "NOTHING PREVENTS IT, ON PURPOSE" and the same 21 % -> 10.0 %,
on a tree where something DID prevent it. Pushed to an absurd
always-binding 95 % reserve it was caught only by SAFETY-24's pre-existing
part 7 wiring checks; part 10 was still green.

THE CAUSE IS STRUCTURAL, not a missing assertion. `replay_loop()`
hand-builds main.py's claim list as a literal
`[supervised, loop, peakguard.claim(...)]`, so it is blind to any claim
main.py ADDS - which is exactly where AC 2 would be built. That is this
repository's named failure mode: a check that observed something other
than what it claimed to observe, shipped as a guarantee inside the
document that recommends the change.

THE FIX IS 10f: THE CLAIM-SOURCE SET, PINNED, two ways because the two
fail differently.

  * STATICALLY, over `Controller.cycle()`'s own AST. Every
    `claims.append(...)` in it must be one the scan can read - an
    unreadable append FAILS rather than counting as nothing, which is how
    a scan like this goes quietly vacuous - and the sources it can file
    must be exactly {device, supervised, failsafe, safety, peak,
    arbitrage, maintenance, loop}. A ninth takes part 10 red on the line
    it is written, in every configuration, whether or not any fixture
    here reaches the state that files it.
  * DYNAMICALLY, through REAL `Controller.cycle()`s with main.py's OWN
    `resolve` spied - not a list this file built and hoped matched -
    swept over the WHOLE 0..100 % SoC range in the two states 10a-10c
    replay. Idle: exactly {device, supervised, loop}. Floor-limited:
    exactly {device, supervised, loop, peak}. A claim conditioned on a
    low pack, which is the shape a loop-side floor has, cannot hide from
    a sweep that visits 0 %.

And the fold is checked rather than assumed: main.py's two P_SAFETY
rating limits are both symmetric LIMITs, so replay_loop() modelling them
as one `supervised` claim at the tighter bound is exact.

MEASURED AGAINST THE COUNTEREXAMPLE. Reproduced first on the unfixed
tree (green, as reported). On this tree the reviewer's Option B at its
recommended default takes part 10 RED on 3 checks, and the 95 % variant
on 6. Nine mutations were run in all, each against a freshly copied tree
with no `__pycache__` present, mounted `:ro`; all nine red, no survivors,
no `+0 B` delta. MUTATION.md records why a second round was needed: the
first round's mutations were all aimed at DISARMING the guard, while the
claim part 10 actually made was about the guard being FIXED.

The four false sentences are replaced with what is now true, and each
says WHICH half catches WHICH shape - 10f for an arbiter claim
(Options B and C), 10a-10c for a clamp inside control.compute() or the
guard (Option D), which the replay drives directly.

AC 2 IS STILL OPEN AND NOTHING HERE BUILDS IT. The loop-side floor was a
test mutant, reverted before commit. The memo still says "Status: OPEN.
This is a memo, not a decision."

Also, non-blocking, from the same review: the NOT READY banner had
inherited the new scope sentence and become a ~550-character paragraph
that the row three lines below repeated verbatim. A checks() row may now
carry an optional short `banner` form; the floor-limited row does, and
`status_payload()` prefers it. THE ROW IS UNCHANGED - shortening that
would have been weakening AC 3 - and rows without the key are
unaffected. Graded, and mutated: dropping the short form goes red.

Merged origin/release/1.0 first (CI-02), keeping both tickets' CHANGELOG
entries.

Full suite green: 17/17 in goodwe-addon-ci (test_ci_gate.py needs `git`,
which CI-02 added to .gitea/ci/Dockerfile but the local image lacks; run
with it installed and it passes).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-01 05:04:22 +02:00

GoodWe RS485 Controller — Home Assistant add-on repository

Replaces a GoodWe battery inverter's vendor controller with a local one: holds net grid exchange at zero by emulating the inverter's smart meter over RS485, and runs the monthly battery maintenance cycle the vendor box was doing.

repository.yaml            add-on repository metadata
goodwe_controller/         the add-on
  config.yaml              manifest + options schema (the per-site config form)
  app/                     the controller
    control.py             the control law — pure functions, no I/O
    maintenance.py         the monthly cycle state machine
    hass.py                Supervisor/Core API access
    store.py               persistent state in /data
    mqtt.py                optional status entities
    web.py                 ingress UI
    main.py                orchestration, heartbeat, failsafe behaviour
  test_control.py          runnable checks — no framework needed
  test_maintenance.py      runnable checks — walks a full cycle in fake time
  DOCS.md                  the add-on's documentation tab
  MUTATION.md              how to run a mutation so the result means something
  tools/mutation_run.sh    the mutation harness - purges bytecode, then grades
firmware/goodwe-master.yaml  ESPHome config for the T-CAN485
estop/rs485_log.py           optional RS485 e-stop / bus witness
docs/GoodWe-RS485-Field-Guide.pdf  the guide techs carry (10pp, A4)
docs/build_guide.py          its single source - rebuilds the HTML and PDF
FIELD-GUIDE.md             how to edit and rebuild the guide

Picking this up after a break? Read HANDOVER.md first — current state, what is known broken, and what to do next.

Install

Settings → Add-ons → Add-on store → ⋮ → Repositories → add

https://gittea.kammenstraatha.duckdns.org/admin/goodwe-addon

then install GoodWe RS485 Controller.

⚠️ The repository must be PUBLIC for this to work. Home Assistant clones it anonymously; against a private repo the store shows nothing and gives no useful error. If it must stay private, install locally instead: copy goodwe_controller/ into the machine's /addons/ folder, then ha store reload — it appears as a Local add-on.

⚠️ Bump version: in goodwe_controller/config.yaml for every change. Supervisor keys the built image by that version, so without a bump it silently reuses the old image and your fix appears not to work — on your bench and on every client's machine.

Requires Home Assistant OS or Supervised. Add-ons cannot be installed on HA Container or Core.

Read this first

The inverter holds its last command forever. It has no meter-timeout of its own — a controller that dies mid-command leaves the battery running until a human intervenes. Measured on real hardware: 5 kW of discharge held for 113 seconds after a controller went silent.

Three layers exist because of that, and only the third covers the Home Assistant machine itself dying:

  1. ESP32 watchdog — no fresh setpoint for ~30 s → command 0 W, and keep commanding it.
  2. Wind-down before firmware updates — 0 W written before the update starts.
  3. RS485 e-stop (optional) — writes 0 W after 30 s of total bus silence.

Sites sold without the e-stop must have the acknowledgement in FIELD-GUIDE.md §10 signed.

Development

The control law and the maintenance machine are pure Python with no Home Assistant imports, so they run anywhere:

cd goodwe_controller
python3 test_control.py
python3 test_maintenance.py

Both must pass before shipping any change. To prove a check bites - the way almost every claim in this repository was established - mutate the module and run tools/mutation_run.sh, which clears __pycache__ first. It is not optional: a same-size edit reverted inside one second leaves CPython reusing the old bytecode, and the run grades code that is not there. goodwe_controller/MUTATION.md has the mechanism, the measurement, and what the flags do not do. They are not unit-test theatre — each assertion corresponds to a rule whose absence produced an observed failure on real hardware, and the comments in control.py say which.

Compatibility

Check the serial number, not the model name. Characters 6-8 of the serial are the platform tag:

tag platform verdict
ESU EMU ESA BPS BPU EMJ IJL 105 — ES/EM/BP, AA55-era meter bus supported
SPB SPN 745 — SBP G2 (GW…-SBP-20) no
ESN ESC 745 — ES G2 (GW…-ES-20) no
ETU EHU BTU … 205/745/753 — ET/EH/BT hybrids no
SDT DST MSU NSU … PV-only inverters — no battery to control no

A "-20" or "G2" suffix means a different platform with a different meter protocol. The tags come from the goodwe library's PLATFORM_105_MODELS, which is also what Home Assistant's own integration uses to pick a protocol.

  • GoodWe ES / BP family inverters (AA55 / RS485 meter-bus generation)
  • The protocol is reverse-engineered. There is no vendor contract, and a firmware change on GoodWe's side could break every installation at once. Say so when you sell it.
S
Description
No description provided
Readme
18 MiB
Languages
Python 98.1%
JavaScript 1.2%
CSS 0.3%
Shell 0.2%
HTML 0.2%