Sharing a single PySeqIter between threads could double-DECREF the underlying sequence on the exhaustion path and use the sequence after free while another thread was inside PySequence_GetItem. (See #156310.)

This applies the same approach used for listiter, tupleiter and reversed (gh-120608, #120971).

• it_index is accessed with FT_ATOMIC_LOAD/STORE_SSIZE_RELAXED and -1 becomes the exhaustion sentinel.
• In the free-threaded build the iterator keeps its strong reference to the sequence until it is deallocated, so no next() call can free the sequence while another thread is using it.
• __length_hint__, __reduce__ and __setstate__ now key off the index sentinel so that an exhausted iterator behaves the same in both builds, matching what reversed does since gh-120608: Make reversed iterator work with free-threading #120971).
• An exhausted iterator keeps the sequence alive until the iterator itself is collected, like listiter/tupleiter/reversed.
• Concurrent iteration may still see duplicate or missing items; this change only removes the memory unsafety.

New test in Lib/test/test_free_threading/test_iteration.py. It uses a small sequence and many rounds so that many threads reach the racy exhaustion path simultaneously, and asserts the sequence's refcount is intact afterwards — the double-DECREF does not always crash, but it reliably shows up as a sagging refcount. On 53d2e14 (main) the test segfaults a free-threaded build.

• Issue: Sharing PySeqIter across threads use-after-frees the sequence under free-threading #156310