feat(fs): Add filesystem validation test suite and related configurat…

[JakubAndrysek]

This pull request introduces a new filesystem validation test suite for ESP32, covering SPIFFS, FFat, and LittleFS implementations. It adds comprehensive documentation, configuration files, and a basic test runner to facilitate automated testing and highlight differences between the filesystems.

Test Suite and Documentation

• Added a detailed README.md explaining the scope, test categories, and known filesystem-specific behaviours for SPIFFS, FFat, and LittleFS.

Test and Configuration Files

• Added a partition table (partitions.csv) defining regions for each filesystem type to support the test suite.
• Added a CI configuration file (ci.yml) specifying that QEMU is not used for these tests.
• Added a test runner script (test_fs.py) that uses pytest_embedded and pytest_embedded_wokwi to execute the Unity-based tests on the DUT (Device Under Test).

Test scenarios

Tested in Wokwi:
esp32: SUCCESS
esp32c3: SUCCESS
esp32c6: SUCCESS
esp32h2: SUCCESS
esp32p4: SUCCESS
esp32s2: SUCCESS
esp32s3: SUCCESS

Also successfully tested on esp32 and esp32s3.

[github-actions]

	Messages
📖	🎉 Good Job! All checks are passing!

👋 Hello JakubAndrysek, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

---

📘 Please review the project's Contributions Guide for key guidelines on code, documentation, testing, and more.

---

🖊️ Please also make sure you have read and signed the Contributor License Agreement for this project.

---

Click to see more instructions ...

This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...

We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests.

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
4. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against a9a4e99

[github-actions]

Test Results

 83 files   83 suites   16m 21s ⏱️
 39 tests  38 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌ 1 🔥
248 runs  241 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌ 7 🔥

For more details on these errors, see this check.

Results for commit a9a4e99.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.