ci: migrate to github default arm runners

[lvaroqui]

No description provided.

[greptile-apps]

Confidence Score: 5/5

[High impact] The PR appears safe to merge; no actionable issues were found.

Summary

Moves ARM builds in CI and releases from the custom runner to ubuntu-24.04-arm.

• CI and releases build ARM binaries on GitHub’s default runner.

_{Reviews (1) · Last reviewed commit: "ci: migrate to github default arm runner..." · Reviewed by Greptile}

[codspeed]

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 10.36%

⚠️ 59 benchmarks measured no execution time

Nothing ran under measurement, usually because the compiler removed the code under test. These results are not comparable, so they count as unchanged.

Preventing compiler optimizations

• small_drop
• "*benchmark/" '
• tsc (aarch64)
• iter
• iter_with_large_setup
• iter_with_large_drop
• iter_batched_small_input
• iter_batched_ref_small_input
• with_input[5]
• with_input[5]
• …and 49 more

⚠️ 9 benchmarks spent significant time in system calls

System calls cannot be consistently instrumented, so they are not included in the measure, which understates the real cost. Please switch to the Walltime instrument to accurately measure system calls.

Measurement and system calls

• instant
• system_time
• print_env_hello
• allocate
• fibo_recursive_cached
• bench_large_input
• recursive_memoized[HashMap<u64, u64>, 0]
• bench_large_input_local
• iter_manual_simple

ℹ️ 49 benchmarks have no flame graph

• The flamegraph could not be generated because too much time was spent in runtime internals, making the visualization not useful for performance analysis. (1 benchmark)
• The flamegraph could not be generated because no execution data was recorded when the benchmark was run. Ensure that the benchmark has not been optimized out. (48 benchmarks)

• fib_in_thread_bench_local[30]
• iter_manual_async
• add
• tsc (x86)
• mul
• tsc (x86)
• fibo_10
• bench_array2[10]
• bench_array2[1]
• bench_array2[4]
• …and 39 more

⚠️ Different runtime environments detected

Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.

Open the report in CodSpeed to investigate

⚡ 9 improved benchmarks
❌ 13 (👁 13) regressed benchmarks
✅ 572 untouched benchmarks

Performance Changes

	Mode	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
⚡	Simulation	rem	232.3 ns	178.1 ns	+30.42%
⚡	Simulation	div	232.3 ns	178.1 ns	+30.42%
⚡	Simulation	find_highest_set_bit[42]	283.5 ns	229.3 ns	+23.62%
⚡	Simulation	find_highest_set_bit[1024]	283.5 ns	229.3 ns	+23.62%
⚡	Simulation	find_highest_set_bit[255]	283.5 ns	229.3 ns	+23.62%
⚡	Simulation	find_highest_set_bit[65535]	283.5 ns	229.3 ns	+23.62%
⚡	WallTime	instant	44 ns	37 ns	+18.92%
⚡	Simulation	process_items_with_counter	1.9 µs	1.8 µs	+5.94%
⚡	WallTime	hamiltonian_cycle[5]	1.5 µs	1.5 µs	+3.23%
👁	WallTime	div	3 ns	4 ns	-25%
👁	WallTime	recursive_memoized[BTreeMap<u64, u64>, 30]	3.4 µs	3.6 µs	-3.04%
👁	WallTime	recursive_memoized[HashMap<u64, u64>, 10]	1.9 µs	2.1 µs	-10.64%
👁	WallTime	permutations[6]	68.4 µs	70.8 µs	-3.41%
👁	WallTime	iter_batched_per_iteration	46 ns	49 ns	-6.12%
👁	WallTime	iter_batched_ref_large_input	5 ns	9 ns	-44.44%
👁	WallTime	iter_batched_large_input	8 ns	10 ns	-20%
👁	WallTime	mut_borrow	7 ns	47 ns	-85.11%
👁	WallTime	init_array[42]	35 ns	37 ns	-5.41%
👁	Simulation	add_two_integers[(1024, -1024)]	295.2 ns	349.4 ns	-15.5%
👁	Simulation	add_two_integers[(42, 13)]	233.8 ns	288 ns	-18.81%
...	...	...	...	...	...

ℹ️ Only the first 20 benchmarks are displayed. Go to the app to view all benchmarks.

Tip

Curious why performance improved? Comment @codspeedbot explain why performance improved on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

---

_{Comparing cod-3837-migrate-from-codspeedhq-arm64-ubuntu-204-github-runners-to (fdb6c93) with main (d07bbd0)}