x86, locking: Use no more OOSTORE nonsense

Paul reported that X86_OOSTORE is dead, yay! Update a comment and
remove a newly added reference.

Reported-by: Paul Bolle <pebolle@tiscali.nl>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140611090509.GC3588@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>

arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h

@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@
 #if defined(CONFIG_X86_PPRO_FENCE)
 
 /*
- * For either of these options x86 doesn't have a strong TSO memory
+ * For this option x86 doesn't have a strong TSO memory
  * model and we should fall back to full barriers.
  */
 

arch/x86/include/asm/qrwlock.h

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 
 #include <asm-generic/qrwlock_types.h>
 
-#if !defined(CONFIG_X86_OOSTORE) && !defined(CONFIG_X86_PPRO_FENCE)
+#ifndef CONFIG_X86_PPRO_FENCE
 #define queue_write_unlock queue_write_unlock
 static inline void queue_write_unlock(struct qrwlock *lock)
 {