Re: [PATCH] docs: Clarify gdb remote protocol AArch64 SVE and SME handling

[Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>]

On Mon, 2 Feb 2026 at 23:41, Luis <luis.machado.foss@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
> On 30/01/2026 09:36, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 at 23:18, Luis <luis.machado.foss@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I don't feel comfortable setting this is stone before we have a
> >> patch that clarifies how this separation between SVE and SME is
> >> achieved.
> >
> > I agree that we don't want to commit this until we're happy that
> > it's the right thing. This patch is my attempt to put down in a
> > concrete form how I think this should work.
> >
> > When you talk about "a patch that clarifies how this separation
> > between SVE and SME is achieved", what do you mean? A patch to
> > gdb? With this proposal, current gdb I think should work without
> > changes. The changes Thiago has are all because of the way that
> > the Linux ptrace API has chosen to represent SVE and SME, AIUI.
>
> We need a couple things from what I can see.
>
> First we need to teach gdb about SME without SVE, and that's what Thiago
> is working on. I´d like to see that patch first before we adjust the
> documentation for the SME-but-no-SVE mode. Just to make sure things match.

Hi -- I just wanted to come back to this thread to ask how
the "native (ptrace) gdb SME-no-SVE" support is going. Do
we now have that landed, or at least solid enough that we are
happy to update the remote-protocol documentation?

thanks
-- PMM