*: unify if_is_loopback/if_is_loopback_or_vrf

We should always treat the VRF interface as a loopback. Currently, this
is not the case, because in some old pre-VRF code we use if_is_loopback
instead of if_is_loopback_or_vrf. To avoid any future problems, the
proposal is to rename if_is_loopback_or_vrf to if_is_loopback and use it
everywhere. if_is_loopback is renamed to if_is_loopback_exact in case
it's ever needed, but currently it's not used anywhere.

Signed-off-by: Igor Ryzhov <iryzhov@nfware.com>

1 files changed, 4 insertions, 3 deletions

diff --git a/lib/if.c b/lib/if.c
index a40f04f5a2..268dc7454b 100644
--- a/lib/if.c
+++ b/lib/if.c
@@ -698,7 +698,7 @@ int if_is_no_ptm_operative(const struct interface *ifp)
 }
 
 /* Is this loopback interface ? */
-int if_is_loopback(const struct interface *ifp)
+int if_is_loopback_exact(const struct interface *ifp)
 {
 	/* XXX: Do this better, eg what if IFF_WHATEVER means X on platform M
 	 * but Y on platform N?
@@ -712,9 +712,10 @@ int if_is_vrf(const struct interface *ifp)
 	return CHECK_FLAG(ifp->status, ZEBRA_INTERFACE_VRF_LOOPBACK);
 }
 
-bool if_is_loopback_or_vrf(const struct interface *ifp)
+/* Should this interface be treated as a loopback? */
+bool if_is_loopback(const struct interface *ifp)
 {
-	if (if_is_loopback(ifp) || if_is_vrf(ifp))
+	if (if_is_loopback_exact(ifp) || if_is_vrf(ifp))
 		return true;
 
 	return false;