Emily Shaffer authored Sep 30, 2019 and Junio C Hamano committed Oct 02, 2019

Previously, when promisor_remote_move_to_tail() is called for a
promisor_remote which is currently the final element in promisors, a
cycle is created in the promisors linked list. This cycle leads to a
double free later on in promisor_remote_clear() when the final element
of the promisors list is removed: promisors is set to promisors->next (a
no-op, as promisors->next == promisors); the previous value of promisors
is free()'d; then the new value of promisors (which is equal to the
previous value of promisors) is also free()'d. This double-free error
was unrecoverable for the user without removing the filter or re-cloning
the repo and hoping to miss this edge case.

Now, when promisor_remote_move_to_tail() would be a no-op, just do a
no-op. In cases of promisor_remote_move_to_tail() where r is not already
at the tail of the list, it works as before.

Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>
Acked-by: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>