profiling: Correct profiling data array size

[jlucovsky]

The profiling arrays are incorrectly sized by the number of thread modules. Since they contain app-layer protocol data, they should be sized by ALPROTO_MAX.

Link to ticket: https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/7334

Describe changes:

• Size packet-based profiling arrays that cover app-layer protocols properly

Provide values to any of the below to override the defaults.

• To use an LibHTP, Suricata-Verify or Suricata-Update pull request,
  link to the pull request in the respective _BRANCH variable.
• Leave unused overrides blank or remove.

SV_REPO=
SV_BRANCH=
SU_REPO=
SU_BRANCH=
LIBHTP_REPO=
LIBHTP_BRANCH=

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.72%. Comparing base (55b922c) to head (bbbec0f).
Report is 10 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #11983      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   82.75%   82.72%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         910      910              
  Lines      249016   249016              
==========================================
- Hits       206069   205999      -70     
- Misses      42947    43017      +70     

Flag	Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus	60.81% <ø> (ø)
livemode	18.74% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
pcap	44.08% <ø> (-0.05%)	⬇️
suricata-verify	62.26% <ø> (-0.03%)	⬇️
unittests	59.00% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

[suricata-qa]

Information: QA ran without warnings.

Pipeline 23128

[victorjulien]

Merged in #12004, thanks!