blockservice: add WithContentBlocker option

[Jorropo]

The goal is to help with ipfs-shipyard/nopfs#34.

[Jorropo]

Current dependencies on/for this PR:

• main
  • PR blockservice: optimize getBlocks filter by not rescanning the already valid leading elements #558
    • PR blockservice: fix symbol name in docs #559
      • PR blockservice: stop using deprecated NewWriteThrough in tests #560
        • PR blockservice: remove deprecated NewWriteThrough function #565
        • PR blockservice: move session handling as part of the interface #563
          • PR blockservice: remove inner fields access methods #564
        • PR blockservice: move to single unique struct and add WithContentBlocker option #561
          • PR blockservice: remove inner fields access methods #562
            • PR Move providing responsabilities from bitswap to blockservice #534
              • PR Remove content routing from bitswap network #535
                • PR Remove provider query manager #536
        • PR blockservice: add WithContentBlocker option #556 👈
          • PR blockservice: optimize getBlocks filter by not rescanning the already valid leading elements #557

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 3 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (b8ac21b) 65.16% compared to head (5d0398e) 65.48%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #556      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   65.16%   65.48%   +0.31%     
==========================================
  Files         204      207       +3     
  Lines       25597    25654      +57     
==========================================
+ Hits        16681    16800     +119     
+ Misses       7433     7371      -62     
  Partials     1483     1483              

Files	Coverage Δ
blockservice/blockservice.go	79.51% <91.66%> (+1.80%)	⬆️

... and 15 files with indirect coverage changes

[Jorropo]

I think we all agree that either #562 or #564 are better alternatives.