[tor-dev] [PATCH] entrynodes.c: Improve readability (issue 9971)

Martin Kepplinger martink at posteo.de
Sat Jun 28 21:57:51 UTC 2014

Maybe we can do away with issue 9971 and improve readability:

As response to this mail, I'll append seperate patches for the 3
sub-issues mentioned. They apply (and are build-tested) seperately to
the current tree, so a maintainer can quickly pick one of them up, if
happy with it.

There shouldn't be a conflict in *1* and *2* but I could append a
patchset anyway.

sub-issue *3* is *only* a call for advice and will be written on top of
the other ones, after discussion.

1* rename entry_guard_t's made_contact to used_so_save_if_down
   I think that's readable. Is that about what arma had in mind?

2* rename for_discovery argument of add_an_entry_guard() to
   I like probationary more than provisional. Those 2 are suggested in
   issue 9971.
   I chose forced_probationary for now, because isn't it strictly a
   suboptimal situation
   in terms of desired 'grade of anonymity'. What do you think?

3* NEEDS REVIEW FIRST: regarding the int arguments of
   add_an_entry_guard(). I look at:

   node_t *chosen       is a node to add.
   prepend              is set if the guard should become first in the

   there are 2 users of add_an_entry_guard() that pass it a chosen
   node. One is a bridge (prepend) and the other one is a user-defined
   node (!prepend), so:

   Given the fact that the list is not supposed to be long and the two
   'users' are somewhat similar, why not prepend the node if explicitly

More information about the tor-dev mailing list