Linux 6.12 compat: Rename range_tree_* to zfs_range_tree_*

[IvanVolosyuk]

Linux 6.12 has conflicting range_tree_{find,destroy,clear} symbols.

Motivation and Context

Linux 6.12 introduced conflicting symbols which cause issues when compiling zfs with --enable-linux-builtin
See #16932 for context.
The change fix compilation in this configuration.

Description

The change is basically:
find . -type f -exec sed -i 's/range_tree_/zfs_range_tree_/g' {} +
... and manually fixing lines > 80 characters to get checkstyle pass.

How Has This Been Tested?

No functional changes, linux kernel 6.12 with ZFS builtin compiled successfully.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Performance enhancement (non-breaking change which improves efficiency)
• Code cleanup (non-breaking change which makes code smaller or more readable)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Library ABI change (libzfs, libzfs_core, libnvpair, libuutil and libzfsbootenv)
• Documentation (a change to man pages or other documentation)

Checklist:

• My code follows the OpenZFS code style requirements.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have read the contributing document.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• I have run the ZFS Test Suite with this change applied.
• All commit messages are properly formatted and contain Signed-off-by.

[amotin]

This is incredibly invasive change. Wish there was some easier one, but whatever. Just a couple thoughts:

• I would not rename metaslab_calculate_range_tree_type();
• You are renaming some things in range_tree.h, but not others. Sure I don't want even more changes, just the logic looks inconsistent.

[IvanVolosyuk]

Yeah, the change was pretty mechanical, I literally ran:
find . -type f -exec sed -i 's/range_tree_/zfs_range_tree_/g' {} +

What did I miss in range_tree.h? I can definitely revert change to metaslab_calculate_range_tree_type.
What about range_tree_t, I can keep it as it is - types cannot conflict with kernel symbols and it will remove a lot of churn.

[behlendorf]

What about range_tree_t, I can keep it as it is - types cannot conflict with kernel symbols and it will remove a lot of churn.

It's unfortunate it's so invasive, but if we're going to have to make this change let's be consistent about it and use zfs_range_tree_t. We had to do the same thing for zfs_btree_t.

[IvanVolosyuk]

I reverted renaming of metaslab_calculate_range_tree_type(), which was changed by mistake.
If I understand @amotin correctly for consistency we want to rename rs_*, range_seg*, RANGE_SEG*. I did that in a separate commit for now. Let me know if I should squash it into the main one.