[SECNET PATCH v2 06/19] site: Rename setup_priority to our_name_later

[Ian Jackson]

This is also used for setting the transform direction - ie,
distinguishing us and them.  We are going to make the priority system
more subtle, and don't want to mess with that bit while changing the
priority rules.

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ijackson at chiark.greenend.org.uk>
---
v2: Fix conflict due to rebase on top of bugfix
     "site.c: Cope with failure of transform `setkey' method."
---
 site.c | 9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/site.c b/site.c
index 3908535..bd633f3 100644
--- a/site.c
+++ b/site.c
@@ -328,8 +328,7 @@ struct site {
 				      after this time, initiate a new
 				      key exchange */
 
-    bool_t setup_priority; /* Do we have precedence if both sites emit
-			      message 1 simultaneously? */
+    bool_t our_name_later; /* our name > peer name */
     uint32_t log_events;
 
 /* runtime information */
@@ -557,7 +556,7 @@ static _Bool set_new_transform(struct site *st, char *pk)
     struct transform_if *generator=st->chosen_transform;
     struct transform_inst_if *generated=generator->create(generator->st);
     ok = generated->setkey(generated->st,st->sharedsecret,
-			   st->sharedsecretlen,st->setup_priority);
+			   st->sharedsecretlen,st->our_name_later);
 
     dispose_transform(&st->new_transform);
     if (!ok) return False;
@@ -1797,7 +1796,7 @@ static bool_t site_incoming(void *sst, struct buffer_if *buf,
 	    /* We've just sent a message 1! They may have crossed on
 	       the wire. If we have priority then we ignore the
 	       incoming one, otherwise we process it as usual. */
-	    if (st->setup_priority) {
+	    if (st->our_name_later) {
 		BUF_FREE(buf);
 		if (!st->msg1_crossed_logged++)
 		    slog(st,LOG_SETUP_INIT,"crossed msg1s; we are higher "
@@ -2130,7 +2129,7 @@ static list_t *site_apply(closure_t *self, struct cloc loc, dict_t *context,
     /* The information we expect to see in incoming messages of type 1 */
     /* fixme: lots of unchecked overflows here, but the results are only
        corrupted packets rather than undefined behaviour */
-    st->setup_priority=(strcmp(st->localname,st->remotename)>0);
+    st->our_name_later=(strcmp(st->localname,st->remotename)>0);
 
     buffer_new(&st->buffer,SETUP_BUFFER_LEN);
 
-- 
2.11.0