sync: signal pt before sync_timeline object gets destroyed
There is a race condition

Assume we have *one* sync_fence object, with *one* sync_pt
which belongs to *one* sync_timeline, given this condition,
sync_timeline->kref will have two counts, one for sync_timeline
(implicit) and another for sync_pt.

Assume following is the situation on CPU

Theead-1 : (Thread which calls sync_timeline_destroy())
  -> (some function calls)
   -> sync_timeline_destory()
    -> sync_timeline_signal() (CPU is inside this
function after putting reference to sync_timeline)

At this time Thread-2 comes and does following

Thread-2 : (fclose on fence fd)
> sync_fence_release() -> because of fclose() on fence object
 -> sync_fence_free()
  -> sync_pt_free()
   -> kref_put(&pt->parent->kref, sync_timeline_free);
    -> sync_timeline_free() (CPU is inside this because
this time kref will be zero after _put)

Thread-2 will free sync_timeline object before Thread-1
has finished its work inside sync_timeline_signal.

With this change we signals all sync_pt before putting
reference to sync_timeline object.
sync: Fix a race condition between release_obj and print_obj
Before this change, a timeline would only be removed from the timeline
list *after* the sync driver had its release_obj() called. However, the
driver's release_obj() may free resources needed by print_obj().

Although the timeline list is locked when print_obj() is called, it is
not locked when release_obj() is called. If one CPU was in print_obj()
when another was in release_obj(), the print_obj() may make unsafe
accesses.

It is not actually necessary to hold the timeline list lock when calling
release_obj() if the call is made after the timeline is unlinked from
the list, since there is no possibility another thread could be in --
or enter -- print_obj() for that timeline.

This change moves the release_obj() call to after the timeline is
unlinked, preventing the above race from occurring.