[ixp1200] Micro C Compiler

[Cyrus Hall]

On Wed, 2003-08-20 at 08:12, Øyvind Hvamstad wrote:
> 1. Has anyone been able to run uccl.exe through wine? (I can't, and
> vmware isn't cheap)

Unknown - I've been meaning to play with both uca.exe and uccl.exe for
some time.  I'll get back to you if I have some time to do so this
afternoon.

> 2. When trying to compile the Bridging example from the IXP Programming
> book, the file DispachLoop.h is nowhere to be found. Are there some
> secret library that I need? Or should I already have it? (Couldn't find
> it)

Intel never implemented it.  The response I got from the authors
follows:

"Well, I've got bad news and good news.  The bad news is that Intel
decided (after we wrote the book) to not support the writing of
microblocks in microengine C in IXA SDK2.x.  The good news is that we
have re-written the sample microblock in microengine assembly and put it
on the errata page.  All of the concepts still apply, it is just a
different language.  Here is a link to the errata web page:

http://www.intel.com/intelpress/ixp1200/errata.htm"

I've ended up implementing my projects in microcode instead of microC.

> 3. Would you recommend me to use microC instead of microcode? (Any known
> quirks?)

I decided that if Intel hadn't implemented what seemed to be a
documented and seemingly major library for microC, that I didn't want to
play with it only to find other things left unimplemented or buggy.

> 4. Would using microC involve having to port several microcode blocks?

If by blocks you mean the DispatchLoop stuff, not necessarily.  One
could certainly write the packet ingress and egress code from scratch in
microC, and I think others on the list have done just that.  They should
be able to point you in the right direction.

One should also be able to write dispatch loops in microcode and then
link to other microcode generated from microC.  This is probably the
fastest development option in the 2.0 dev environment.  Anyone else have
any comments on this?

Best of luck,
Cyrus