refactor: remove extraneous lock annotations from function definitions

[theuni]

These annotations belong in the declarations rather than the definitions. While harmless now, future versions of clang may warn about these.

Discovered these using the upstream WIP: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/67520

[DrahtBot]

The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Code Coverage

For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.

Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process.	Type	Reviewers
ACK	instagibbs, maflcko

If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

[theuni]

I should've mentioned in the description that all of these already have proper annotations in their corresponding declarations which is why they're safe to remove. But reviewers should obviously double-check that.

[instagibbs]

ACK 5729dbbb7424d02c5e5bc4f2eb340fdc1c0100b4

manually checked that all these annotations still live in the declarations

[maflcko]

ACK 5729dbbb7424d02c5e5bc4f2eb340fdc1c0100b4 🦋

Show signature

Signature: ``` untrusted comment: signature from minisign secret key on empty file; verify via: minisign -Vm "${path_to_any_empty_file}" -P RWTRmVTMeKV5noAMqVlsMugDDCyyTSbA3Re5AkUrhvLVln0tSaFWglOw -x "${path_to_this_whole_four_line_signature_blob}" RUTRmVTMeKV5npGrKx1nqXCw5zeVHdtdYURB/KlyA/LMFgpNCs+SkW9a8N95d+U4AP1RJMi+krxU1A3Yux4bpwZNLvVBKy0wLgM= trusted comment: ACK 5729dbbb7424d02c5e5bc4f2eb340fdc1c0100b4 🦋 zGDwiYOysORatmPRkyxTlE8MYfUx4FBQyF1scw2iZzTkLsBw9dr84qXRJN1sH/zi6S3X/wAcRlNm5NSORToJBA== ```