Broadlink RM4C Mini "not supported"?

I’ve been trying to get a new Broadlink RM4C Mini to integrate with Home Assistant Core 2022.7.3 for the past several hours. The system keeps saying “device not supported”, but I’ve read that supposedly it is supported. Was support removed in 2022.7.3?!

Still supported - but maybe there has been a firmware upgrade?

You may need to unlock it - I believe you can do that these days in the Broadlink app.

I’ve unlocked it in the Broadlink app.

All mine have worked flawlessly for over a year so I am a bit rusty - but you can confirm the internal model name and firmware using the python-broadlink tool.

It looks like there is a bunch of new model codes unsupported.

I see you have already opened an issue on GitHub (which is probably a duplicate). You could try installing the Broadlink integration as a custom component and modifying the code - if someone hasn’t already had a go. Looks like the new models started coming in around May.

he thing is, even after I add it to, I still get exactly the same error.

Logger: homeassistant.components.broadlink.config_flow
Source: components/broadlink/
Integration: Broadlink (documentation, issues)
First occurred: July 11, 2022 at 9:16:12 PM (8 occurrences)
Last logged: 3:16:52 PM

Unsupported device: 0x520d. If it worked before, please open an issue at Issues · home-assistant/core · GitHub

    0x62BE: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),
    0x6364: ("RM4S", "Broadlink"),
    0x648D: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
    0x6539: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),        
    **0x520D: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),**
rm4pro: {
    0x6026: ("RM4 pro", "Broadlink"),
    0x6184: ("RM4C pro", "Broadlink"),

Bummer… I suggest jumping on to Github and reading the other cases for the same issue. Maybe one of them can assist - or go onto Discord - that’s where the devs hang out.

Interesting I have the 520d model too and was able to get it to work. I did add it “in order” just after 520c. Also have to restart after.

1 Like

Instead of fiddling with the code it would be better to update your HA core to at least core-2022.5.x and up. See also your cross posts here and here.


Seems something is wrong with your installation or maybe you have a faked RM4C mini? As I said I use four of these RM4C minis since May (HA core-2022.5.x) up to HA core-2022.7.5 by today without any issues (I just added another 2 of them yesterday).

I have dug deeper for a RM4C mini and could not find that particular model as device type 0x520D. As for the RM4C mini Broadlink lists them as device type 0x62be and 0x610F only.

What is BroadlinkManager saying about the exact device type your are trying to set up?

Hi Kevin619, you’re not alone. I have two BroadLink RM4C Mini and it’s impossible for me to integrate with HA Supervisor 2022.7.7.
I wish someone could give a light about it.

In June there was a pull request merged in to add support for BestCon RM4C Mini with product id 0x520d. However it looks like the change was never released in a new version of the python-broadlink package.

I requested a new release here:

If you’re affected by this, you’d see “Unsupported device: 0x520d” in the Home Assistant Broadlink logs.


For anyone reading the thread It’s been almost 2 months and it looks like no updates to the library at all including this one.

At this stage installing the plugin and manually editing it is likely your best bet and what I’ll be attempting.

Exactly what do you mean by manually editing, I’m trying to do so, but I can’t find a way, I have HA in a VirtualBox, I access it using the vscode addon and ssh addon, but I don’t know what to edit.

Can you give a little bit more light to it, please.

Yes, Please provide more insight into what needs to be edited to add the 0x520d. Thank you!

As for HA Supervised:

  1. Search for filename under /var/lib/docker/overlay2/<some looooooong string>/merged/local/lib/python3.10/site-packages/

  2. Inside that file find the string rm4mini:
    and below
    0x520C: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
    0x520D: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),

The rm4mini-section should then look like:

    rm4mini: {
        0x51DA: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x5209: ("RM4 TV mate", "Broadlink"),
        0x520C: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x520D: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x5212: ("RM4 TV mate", "Broadlink"),
        0x5216: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x6070: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x610E: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x610F: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x62BC: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x62BE: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x6364: ("RM4S", "Broadlink"),
        0x648D: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x6539: ("RM4C mini", "Broadlink"),
        0x653A: ("RM4 mini", "Broadlink"),
  1. Save and close the file and restart HA.

:warning: Since tampering with system files is not trivial do this at your own risk only! :warning:

Sorry for the delay Tamsy and a big Thank you for your assistance. Note, I am not running HA on Docker so therefore the path provided is not relevant for my installation? My bad for not being more verbose in my attempt to obtain assistance. I am having difficulty finding the to modify and add the 0x520D. Thank you for any added assistance that you can provide.

Much appreciate any added input on what I am missing here?

Which installation method do you use?

Well, finding the correct belonging to the Broadlink integration is obviously mandatory since 0x520D has to be added into that very file. Be careful which file you edit because there might be several files with the same name on the system.

Access your HA through SSH and find that file to edit it accordingly or simply wait for an update to the integration itself.

I will keep searching. thank you!

I am assuming that the reason that I can not find the file so I can add the 0x520D is simply due to the fact that the Integration refuses to do the initial install due to the fact that the IP address/device that I am trying to point it to is a device that it barks “Not Supported”. Since this is the first Broadlink that I am trying to install and the Integration refuses to install then this places me in a catch 22 situation unless there is a way to fake it out to install the integration.