Waiting for activity on the "clean_list" to quiesce is no substitute
for proper locking.

We can have multiple threads competing for "llist_del_first"
via "rds_ib_reuse_mr", and a single thread competing
for "llist_del_all" and "llist_del_first" via "rds_ib_flush_mr_pool".

Since "llist_del_first" depends on "list->first->next" not to change
in the midst of the operation, simply waiting for all current calls
to "rds_ib_reuse_mr" to quiesce across all CPUs is woefully inadequate:

By the time "wait_clean_list_grace" is done iterating over all CPUs to see
that there is no concurrent caller to "rds_ib_reuse_mr", a new caller may
have just shown up on the first CPU.

Furthermore, <linux/llist.h> explicitly calls out the need for locking:
 * Cases where locking is needed:
 * If we have multiple consumers with llist_del_first used in one consumer,
 * and llist_del_first or llist_del_all used in other consumers,
 * then a lock is needed.

Also, while at it, drop the unused "pool" parameter
from "list_to_llist_nodes".
Signed-off-by: Gerd Rausch <gerd.rausch@oracle.com>
Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>