locking/qrwlock: Use 'struct qrwlock' instead of 'struct __qrwlock'

locking/qrwlock: Use 'struct qrwlock' instead of 'struct __qrwlock'

BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1732238
There's no good reason to keep the internal structure of struct qrwlock
hidden from qrwlock.h, particularly as it's actually needed for unlock
and ends up being abstracted independently behind the __qrwlock_write_byte()
function.

Stop pretending we can hide this stuff, and move the __qrwlock definition
into qrwlock, removing the __qrwlock_write_byte() nastiness and using the
same struct definition everywhere instead.

Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeremy.Linton@arm.com
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1507810851-306-2-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
(cherry picked from commit e0d02285f16e8d5810f3d5d5e8a5886ca0015d3b)
Signed-off-by: dann frazier <dann.frazier@canonical.com>
Acked-by: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>
Acked-by: Marcelo Henrique Cerri <marcelo.cerri@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Khalid Elmously <khalid.elmously@canonical.com>