Fix mobile_app cloudhook creation

[edenhaus]

Breaking change

Proposed change

During a debug session with @ludeeus, we found that for some devices a cloudhook already exists but was not saved in the mobile_app config entry. We couldn't identify when they were created (at least on my instance) but they were created before HA 2024.1.
Other integrations like withings are always deleting the cloudhook before creating:

core/homeassistant/components/withings/__init__.py

Lines 334 to 340 in 896ca8c

	if CONF_CLOUDHOOK_URL not in entry.data:
	webhook_id = entry.data[CONF_WEBHOOK_ID]
	# Some users already have their webhook as cloudhook.
	# We remove them to be sure we can create a new one.
	with contextlib.suppress(ValueError):
	await cloud.async_delete_cloudhook(hass, webhook_id)
	webhook_url = await cloud.async_create_cloudhook(hass, webhook_id)

Deleting and then creating returns a different (new) cloudhook url. In the mobile app use case, we don't want to do that as maybe the cloud hook is used by the app even when it was not correctly stored in the config entry.

To reuse already created cloud hooks async_get_or_create_cloudhook is added, which returns the cloudhook_url if a cloudhook for the passed webhook_id exists. Otherwise, a cloudhook is created.

We think that also other integrations like withings can benefit from the new function.

In addition we guard the cloudhook creation with a asyncio.Lock to prevent parallel execution.

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 Device Tracker on Mobile app stopped working with 2024.01 #107021
• This PR is related to issue:
• 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
• 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]

Hey there @home-assistant/core, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (mobile_app) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!

Code owner commands

Code owners of mobile_app 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 mobile_app 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.

[emontnemery]

Looks good, but consider renaming the create-function

[MartinHjelmare]

Nice!