lock free queue enqueue if not empty

I have implemented a lock free queue in C using compare and swap based on http://www.boyet.com/articles/LockfreeQueue.html.

Its working great but I'm trying to integrate this queue into a lock free skip-list that i have implemented. I'm using the skip-list as a priority queue and would like to use the lock free queue inside each node to store multiple values when there is a priority collision. however due to the way nodes are managed in the skip list when i detect a priority collision i need to be able to add the item to the queue only if the queue is not empty.

due to the lock free natu开发者_JS百科re of the queue im not sure how to actually perform this operation.

So basically how would i write an atomic enqueue_if_not_empty operation?

EDIT: As it was noticed, I wrote the function with quite the opposite semantics - enqueuing only into an empty queue. I fixed the name to reflect that, and decided to leave it as is just in case someone will be interested. So, this is not the right answer to the question, but do not downvote please, unless you find another reason :)

Below is an attempt to add EnqueueIfEmpty() to the queue implementation in the referenced paper. I did not verify that it works or even compiles. The basic idea is that you insert a new node right after the head (and not the tail), provided that head's next is currently null (which is the necessary condition for an empty queue). I left additional checks for head being equal to tail, which possibly can be removed.

public bool EnqueueIfEmpty(T item) {
  // Return immediately if the queue is not empty.
  // Possibly the first condition is redundant.
  if (head!=tail || head.Next!=null)
      return false;

  SingleLinkNode<T> oldHead = null;

  // create and initialize the new node
  SingleLinkNode<T> node = new SingleLinkNode<T>();
  node.Item = item;

  // loop until we have managed to update the tail's Next link 
  // to point to our new node
  bool Succeeded = false;
  while (head==tail && !Succeeded) {

    // save the current value of the head
    oldHead = head;         

    // providing that the tail still equals to head...
    if (tail == oldHead) {

      // ...and its Next field is null...
      if (oldhead.Next == null) {

        // ...try inserting new node right after the head.
        // Do not insert at the tail, because that might succeed
        // with a non-empty queue as well.
        Succeeded = SyncMethods.CAS<SingleLinkNode<T>>(ref head.Next, null, node);
      }

      // if the head's Next field was non-null, another thread is
      // in the middle of enqueuing a new node, so the queue becomes non-empty
      else {
        return false;
      }
    }
  }

  if (Succeeded) {
    // try and update the tail field to point to our node; don't
    // worry if we can't, another thread will update it for us on
    // the next call to Enqueue()
    SyncMethods.CAS<SingleLinkNode<T>>(ref tail, oldHead, node);
  }
  return Succeeded;
}

Well, Enqueue-If-Not-Empty appears to be relatively straightforward, but with a limitation: other threads may concurrently remove all previous items from the queue, so that after insertion at the tail is done, the new item might happen to be the first in the queue. Since atomic compare-and-swap operations are done with different fields (enqueuing changes tail.Next while dequeuing advances head), stronger guarantees would require additional complexity not only in this function but at least in Dequeue() as well.

The following changes to the normal Enqueue() method are sufficient:
1) at the function start, check for head.Next being null, and if so, return immediately as the queue is empty.
2) add head.Next!=null into the loop condition in case enqueuing attempts should be stopped if the initially non-empty queue becomes empty before insertion succeeds. This does not prevent the situation I descibed above (because there is a time window between the check for emptiness and the node insertion), but reduces its chance to happen.
3) at the end of the function, only try advancing the tail if the new node was successfully enqueued (like I did in the Enqueue-If-Empty answer).