Is STM32U5G9 supported yet? Hey ST, what is the status? (CubeMX, GPU2D)

[TDJ]

I noticed that STM32U5G9 MCUs are already available for purchase. That is, STM32U5G9J-DK1, STM32U5G9J-DK2 and several bare bone chips.

1) In CubeMX those products are still marked as 'coming soon' but this is the least of the problems.
2) The most simple CubeMX-generated project does not build. stm32u5xx.h file is missing, stm32u5g9xx.h file is nowhere to be found, Drivers\CMSIS\Device\ST\STM32U5xx\Include folder is empty. Am I missing something? Was STM32U5G9 CubeMX support ever tested? I used the latest HAL package 1.4, I believe STM32U5G9 support was added in version 1.3.
3) Where do I find the detailed GPU2D documentation describing the details of the new vector graphics functionality? I was unable to find any details on GPU2D, even the one available in STM32U5A9 (no vector graphics) released a year ago. RM0456 section 45 Neo-Chrom graphic processor (GPU2D) counts only 3 (three) pages and looks more like a content placeholder. Is the current ST strategy to get customers to use TouchGFX and its proprietary library? Nothing against TouchGFX but I truly hope this is not the case.

What is the status? What is the roadmap? What to expect and when? Please advise.

[Pavel A.]

The CMSIS includes are where they should be.

https://github.com/STMicroelectronics/cmsis_device_u5/blob/f439f9687257f8e69daccb8dc6c4d1ed8dab73aa/Include/stm32u5g9xx.h

https://github.com/STMicroelectronics/cmsis_device_u5/blob/f439f9687257f8e69daccb8dc6c4d1ed8dab73aa/Include/stm32u5xx.h

[TDJ]

@Pavel A. Thank you for this helpful info, at least I was able to get something working, even though my main question was about CubeMX support and GPU2D docs.

[TDJ · Accepted solution]

I have found a response to my question in NeoChrom/GPU2D registers documentation thread.
The news is not good, NeoChrom/GPU2D detailed documentation is available only to selected partners, not to mere engineers, and I found no open, honest ST's statement on this subject. Is it just someone's oversight? I try to believe it, albeit not without a difficulty.
I am very upset although I do recognize that this decision may be dictated by ST's effort to find partners able to quickly produce high quality software packages and adequate support rather than desire to gain additional profit from license sale and partnership fees.