Using a spinlock to atomically increase a counter sounds wrong -- we've
atomic_t for this!

Also move 'seq_nr' to a different cache line than 'lock' to reduce cache
line trashing. This has the nice side effect of decreasing the size of
struct parallel_data from 192 to 128 bytes for a x86-64 build, e.g.
occupying only two instead of three cache lines.

Those changes results in a 5% performance increase on an IPsec test run
using pcrypt.

Btw. the seq_lock spinlock was never explicitly initialized -- one more
reason to get rid of it.
Signed-off-by: Mathias Krause <mathias.krause@secunet.com>
Acked-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>