Fix #1353, Align mismatched function prototype/implem. parameter names

[thnkslprpt]

Checklist

• I reviewed the Contributing Guide.
• I signed and emailed the appropriate Contributor License Agreement to GSFC-SoftwareRelease@mail.nasa.gov and copied cfs-program@lists.nasa.gov.

Describe the contribution

• Fixes Scrub for mismatched function prototype/implementation parameter names #1353
  • Similar to https://github.com/nasa/cFE/pull/1551/files from cFE

May as well clean these up now to avoid any potential future compiler warnings and ease maintainability/readability.

Note: one of these cases was noticed in #185, but closed as 'won't fix' at the time.

Testing performed
GitHub CI actions (incl. Build + Run, Unit Tests etc.) all passing successfully.

Expected behavior changes
Function prototypes and their implementations should (ideally) always have matching parameter names.

Contributor Info
Avi Weiss @thnkslprpt

[jphickey]

I concur with the general desire to make the names of the parameters consistent between the declaration and definition, but in this case the names in the headers (API) are probably the preferred names for these values. For example, in the "timebase" module, the IDs should all be "timebase_id" rather than "timer_id" (the latter probably a remnant of cut-and-paste from the timer API). Somewhere along the way, the headers got updated appropriately, but the implementation wasn't. We should just update the implementation, not revert the header.

As a side note, cppcheck should be finding and reporting differences in these parameter names, but does not seem to be flagging these items. This might point to a problem with our cppcheck workflow not covering everything it is supposed to.

[jphickey]

Great, thanks!