Merge Android jobs into a single multistep job to better amortize setup time

[bzbarsky-apple]

Problem

Android CI uses a total of ~30 minutes CI time, but a lot of this seems to be work that is duplicated across the three Android jobs.

Change overview

Combine the jobs into one job with steps that build the different configurations.

Testing

Checked that the overall job ran in ~15 minutes.

@mspang I'm a little concerned that the builds after the first one are clearly reusing some build artifacts for the "app" builds; the log at https://github.com/bzbarsky-apple/connectedhomeip/runs/3089960361 shows things like:

> Task :app:javaPreCompileRelease UP-TO-DATE
...
> Task :app:testReleaseUnitTest UP-TO-DATE

etc. Should we instead be deleting something between the steps to ensure more proper "clean" builds, or do we trust whatever build system is involved here enough to assume that it's going to redo whatever work differs between the three configurations correctly?

[mspang]

Problem

Android CI uses a total of ~30 minutes CI time, but a lot of this seems to be work that is duplicated across the three Android jobs.

Change overview

Combine the jobs into one job with steps that build the different configurations.

Testing

Checked that the overall job ran in ~15 minutes.

@mspang I'm a little concerned that the builds after the first one are clearly reusing some build artifacts for the "app" builds; the log at https://github.com/bzbarsky-apple/connectedhomeip/runs/3089960361 shows things like:

> Task :app:javaPreCompileRelease UP-TO-DATE
...
> Task :app:testReleaseUnitTest UP-TO-DATE

etc. Should we instead be deleting something between the steps to ensure more proper "clean" builds, or do we trust whatever build system is involved here enough to assume that it's going to redo whatever work differs between the three configurations correctly?

It doesn't seem surprising to me that java compilation would be considered up to date in followup builds because those steps produce portable bytecode.

While I wouldn't say that I 100% trust it, I don't see an obvious problem here and in fact this likely indicates legitimate savings.

[github-actions]

Size increase report for "esp32-example-build" from f4a6b28

File	Section	File	VM
chip-all-clusters-app.elf	.flash.text	-16	-16
chip-lock-app.elf	.flash.text	64	64
chip-temperature-measurement-app.elf	.flash.text	-51	-60

Full report output

BLOAT REPORT

Files found only in the build output:
    report.csv

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-pigweed-app.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-pigweed-app.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-shell.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-shell.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-all-clusters-app.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-all-clusters-app.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize
.xt.prop._ZN4chip6System5Mutex6UnlockEv,0,108
.xt.lit._ZN4chip11DeviceLayer8Internal35GenericPlatformManagerImpl_FreeRTOSINS0_19PlatformManagerImplEE14_LockChipStackEv,0,48
.xt.lit._ZN4chip11DeviceLayer8Internal35GenericPlatformManagerImpl_FreeRTOSINS0_19PlatformManagerImplEE15_StartChipTimerEj,0,48
.xt.lit._ZN4chip11DeviceLayer8Internal35GenericPlatformManagerImpl_FreeRTOSINS0_19PlatformManagerImplEE16_UnlockChipStackEv,0,48
[Unmapped],0,16
.xt.prop._ZN4chip11DeviceLayer8Internal35GenericPlatformManagerImpl_FreeRTOSINS0_19PlatformManagerImplEE14_LockChipStackEv,0,12
.xt.prop._ZN4chip11DeviceLayer8Internal35GenericPlatformManagerImpl_FreeRTOSINS0_19PlatformManagerImplEE15_StartChipTimerEj,0,12
.xt.prop._ZN4chip11DeviceLayer8Internal35GenericPlatformManagerImpl_FreeRTOSINS0_19PlatformManagerImplEE16_UnlockChipStackEv,0,12
.flash.text,-16,-16
.xt.prop._ZN4chip11DeviceLayer8Internal26GenericPlatformManagerImplINS0_19PlatformManagerImplEE14_InitChipStackEv,0,-40
.xt.lit._ZN4chip11DeviceLayer8Internal35GenericPlatformManagerImpl_FreeRTOSINS0_19PlatformManagerImplEE10_PostEventEPKNS0_15ChipDeviceEventE,0,-80
.xt.lit._ZN4chip6System5Mutex6UnlockEv,0,-128

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-lock-app.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-lock-app.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize
.flash.text,64,64
[Unmapped],0,-64

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-persistent-storage.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-persistent-storage.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-temperature-measurement-app.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-temperature-measurement-app.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize
.flash.text,-60,-51
[Unmapped],0,-4045

[bzbarsky-apple]

@woody-apple @Damian-Nordic @msandstedt @saurabhst @jepenven-silabs @LuDuda @jmartinez-silabs Take a look please? Should help a bit with our CI latency.