slub: do not assert not having lock in removing freed partial

Vladimir reported the following issue:

Commit c65c1877 ("slub: use lockdep_assert_held") requires
remove_partial() to be called with n->list_lock held, but free_partial()
called from kmem_cache_close() on cache destruction does not follow this
rule, leading to a warning:

  WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 2787 at mm/slub.c:1536 __kmem_cache_shutdown+0x1b2/0x1f0()
  Modules linked in:
  CPU: 0 PID: 2787 Comm: modprobe Tainted: G        W    3.14.0-rc1-mm1+ #1
  Hardware name:
   0000000000000600 ffff88003ae1dde8 ffffffff816d9583 0000000000000600
   0000000000000000 ffff88003ae1de28 ffffffff8107c107 0000000000000000
   ffff880037ab2b00 ffff88007c240d30 ffffea0001ee5280 ffffea0001ee52a0
  Call Trace:
    __kmem_cache_shutdown+0x1b2/0x1f0
    kmem_cache_destroy+0x43/0xf0
    xfs_destroy_zones+0x103/0x110 [xfs]
    exit_xfs_fs+0x38/0x4e4 [xfs]
    SyS_delete_module+0x19a/0x1f0
    system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

His solution was to add a spinlock in order to quiet lockdep.  Although
there would be no contention to adding the lock, that lock also requires
disabling of interrupts which will have a larger impact on the system.

Instead of adding a spinlock to a location where it is not needed for
lockdep, make a __remove_partial() function that does not test if the
list_lock is held, as no one should have it due to it being freed.

Also added a __add_partial() function that does not do the lock
validation either, as it is not needed for the creation of the cache.

Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Reported-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@parallels.com>
Suggested-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Acked-by: Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@parallels.com>
Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>