Enable CI Support for ppc64le (IBM Power) Architecture

Hi Team,

We’re reaching out to propose enabling CI support for the ppc64le (IBM Power) architecture in your repository, as part of a broader effort to ensure cross-platform compatibility in the scientific Python ecosystem.

We have started working on the KServe component for ppc64le, and as part of that effort we’d like to ensure upstream dependencies and integrations are well‑supported on the Power architecture.

We’re using a GitHub Actions (GHA)-based runner service provided and maintained by IBM to run jobs for the ppc64le architecture. This setup has already been successfully integrated into projects like:

✅ https://github.com/pyca/cryptography/pull/13130

✅ https://github.com/lightgbm-org/LightGBM/pull/7345

✅ https://github.com/lightgbm-org/LightGBM/pull/7373

✅ https://github.com/numpy/numpy/pull/29212

We’d like to propose enabling the IBM ppc64le GitHub Actions runner in this repository so CI jobs can run on ppc64le using existing workflows. This would help ensure continued compatibility for Power as we advance work on KServe and related components.

Key Benefits:
🔒 Ephemeral and secure runners, isolated per job

🛠️ Maintained by IBM, requires no setup effort from your side

🔁 Integrates with existing GitHub Actions workflows

📚 Technical documentation and usage details:
https://github.com/IBM/actionspz/tree/main/docs

We’re happy to assist with the setup or provide any additional details the team may need.

Thanks so much!

Start by reviewing the repository’s existing GitHub Actions workflows and the IBM actionspz documentation linked in the issue. Determine how the ppc64le runner should be integrated, then verify that the relevant CI jobs execute successfully on that architecture without disrupting existing workflows.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.