Fix handling of hangup timeout during STT processing

[jaminh]

Breaking change

Proposed change

Fix the handling of hangup timeouts during STT processing in the VOIP integration.

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:
• Link to documentation pull request:

This PR is related to: #128372

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.

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

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

[home-assistant]

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

Code owner commands

Code owners of voip 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 voip 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.

[home-assistant]

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

Code owner commands

Code owners of wyoming 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 wyoming 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.

[balloob]

As far as I can see, this PR only adds some debug logging and shuffles some code around. Can you point out the change that fixes it?

[balloob]

Ah I see, the change is to not put this inside the timeout with block. But how does that fix it? It means the chunk is set to the previous value, which is true, otherwise it would have broken.

It means that we will also yield the same audio chunk twice, which is not something we would want.

[jaminh]

I updated to include only the essential changes. The wyoming STT code needed to be updated to catch the TimeoutError as well as the moving the none check and yield out of the wait/timeout block. Chunk shouldn't be yielded with the same value twice because either it is successfully updated with the new value, it is set to None which would result in breaking the loop, or it times out and throws the TimeoutError which is caught in the wyoming STT. Based on my testing I was not able to get a successful call without both of those changes.