[Experimental Bot, please feedback here]

The PR summary and impact descriptions provide a good start, but lack some specifics to fully meet NuttX requirements. Here's a breakdown and suggestions for improvement:

Summary - Needs Improvement:

• Why change is necessary? You mention enhancing write capabilities, but not the underlying reason. Is this a user request? Does it address a specific limitation or bug? Be explicit about the "why".
• What functional part is changed? "romfs extend" is vague. Mention specific files/modules within the ROMFS subsystem that are modified.
• How does the change work? "enable format function" is the result, not the mechanism. Describe at a high-level the technical approach taken (e.g., new data structures, modifications to existing algorithms, etc.).

Impact - Mostly Good:

• New feature added? Clearly stated, but briefly elaborate on the capabilities this new feature provides.
• Impact on user? Mentioning CONFIG_FS_ROMFS_WRITEABLE and -o rw is good, but provide a short example of how a user would utilize this in practice.
• Other impacts: While you mark most as "NO", a multi-part change like this likely has implications. Even if unchanged now, consider:
  • Build: Will later parts require build system changes? If unsure, acknowledge this.
  • Documentation: Part 1 likely needs documentation updates. If not included now, mention it's planned for a later part.

Testing - Needs Significant Improvement:

• Build Hosts & Targets: Provide specifics, don't leave it generic. List OS, versions (compiler especially), and for targets the exact board:config combinations used.
• Testing Logs: "cmoka_fs_test" is not useful. Include relevant snippets of logs demonstrating:
  • The issue BEFORE your change (proving it was a problem)
  • Successful operation AFTER the change
  • Ideally, test cases covering both normal usage AND error handling

Overall:

The PR is on the right track but needs more detail and concrete evidence of testing. Addressing the points above will make it much stronger.