Re: Is Recovery actually paused?

At Wed, 24 Feb 2021 17:56:41 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote in 
> At Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:15:27 +0530, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote in 
> > > After the renaming of the function, the following structure looks
> > > simpler and more natural.
> > >
> > >  while (ConfirmRecoveryPaused())
> > >  {
> > >    ...
> > >    <wait>
> > >  }
> > 
> > So do you mean that if the pause is requested ConfirmRecoveryPaused
> > will set it to paused and if it is not paused then it will return
> > false?  With the current function name, I don't think that will look
> > clean maybe we should change the name to something like
> > CheckAndConfirmRecoveryPaused?  Or I am fine with the way it is now.
> > Any other thoughts?
> 
> I should have took the meaning of "confirm" wrongly.  I took that as
> "somehow determine if the recovery is to be paused".  If that reading
> is completely wrong, I don't mind either re-chaging the function name
> or leaving all it alone.

Ouch. If we choose to re-rename it, it won't be "CheckAnd...".
RecoveryIsPaused() is used for another meaning.  Maybe
RecoveryPauseTriggerd() or such?  (I'm not sure, sorry..)

regards.

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center