Part of what makes futex_unlock_pi() intricate is that
rt_mutex_futex_unlock() -> rt_mutex_slowunlock() can drop
rt_mutex::wait_lock.

This means it cannot rely on the atomicy of wait_lock, which would be
preferred in order to not rely on hb->lock so much.

The reason rt_mutex_slowunlock() needs to drop wait_lock is because it can
race with the rt_mutex fastpath, however futexes have their own fast path.

Since futexes already have a bunch of separate rt_mutex accessors, complete
that set and implement a rt_mutex variant without fastpath for them.
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: juri.lelli@arm.com
Cc: bigeasy@linutronix.de
Cc: xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: rostedt@goodmis.org
Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com
Cc: jdesfossez@efficios.com
Cc: dvhart@infradead.org
Cc: bristot@redhat.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322104151.702962446@infradead.orgSigned-off-by: NThomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>