test: bump brpc_channel_unittest to size=large to fix CI timeout flakiness

[rajvarun77]

Problem

brpc_channel_unittest bundles dozens of timing-sensitive TEST_F (backup
request, retry/backoff, timeouts, connection-failure) into a single test
binary. Each test does real-time waits (server-side sleep_us, backup-request
timers, connection retries). gtest runs them serially in one process, so the
binary's wall time is the sum of all those waits.

On contended CI runners (GitHub-hosted ubuntu-22.04, ~4 shared vCPU with
hypervisor steal) that cumulative time exceeds Bazel's default per-test 300s
limit (size = "medium"), so the binary intermittently fails with TIMEOUT
even though every assertion would pass given enough time.

Evidence (reproduced on GitHub Actions)

Measured on ubuntu-22.04, --nocache_test_results:

Configuration	Result
current (size=medium, 300s), 5 runs under load	TIMEOUT in 4/5 @ 300.0s
size=large (900s), single run	PASSED in 91.7s
size=large (900s), 20 serialized no-cache runs	20/20 PASSED, slowest 114.0s

The nominal run is ~92–114s, but under parallel-job contention the same binary
balloons past 300s — a ~3× slowdown that crosses the medium ceiling. Raising the
limit to large (900s) gives ~8× nominal headroom and absorbs the spike.

Bench runs (throwaway branch, not part of this PR):

• baseline TIMEOUT 4/5 + rejected shard_count=4 experiment FAILED 20/20:
  https://github.com/rajvarun77/brpc/actions/runs/27396621709
• size=large validation (20/20 serialized + 91.7s timing):
  https://github.com/rajvarun77/brpc/actions/runs/27453397271

Fix

Add an optional per_test_size override to the generate_unittests macro and
set brpc_channel_unittest to size = "large". No test source changes.

Why not shard it?

Sharding (shard_count) was tried first and rejected: it fails
deterministically (20/20). brpc_channel_unittest's TEST_F share fixed
loopback endpoints and global state, so running shards as parallel processes
makes a "connection should be refused" test
(ChannelTest.connection_failed_selective) observe another shard's live
server on the same port and see a successful connection instead of
ECONNREFUSED. The tests are not shard-safe; raising the size limit is the only
safe lever without rewriting the suite for isolation.

---

cc @chenBright for review.

[chenBright]

LGTM