tiup cluster prune need to delete storage.remote.cache.dir

[hehechen]

What problem does this PR solve?

After pingcap/tiflash#6967, TiFlash has added storage.remote.cache.dir config, so tiup cluster prune need to delete storage.remote.cache.dir of TiFlash.

What is changed and how it works?

tiup cluster prune support to delete storage.remote.cache.dir of TiFlash.

Check List

Tests

• Unit test
• Integration test
• Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
  ./tiup-cluster prune ctl-test-2
  Check if the storage.remote.cache.dir has been deleted.
• No code

Code changes

• Has exported function/method change
• Has exported variable/fields change
• Has interface methods change
• Has persistent data change

Side effects

• Possible performance regression
• Increased code complexity
• Breaking backward compatibility

Related changes

• Need to cherry-pick to the release branch
• Need to update the documentation

Release notes:

NONE

[ti-chi-bot]

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has been approved by:

• kaaaaaaang

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 50.00% and project coverage change: +5.25 🎉

Comparison is base (d8e9242) 50.99% compared to head (b257911) 56.24%.

❗ Current head b257911 differs from pull request most recent head d15449f. Consider uploading reports for the commit d15449f to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2142      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   50.99%   56.24%   +5.25%     
==========================================
  Files         313      313              
  Lines       33302    33308       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits        16981    18733    +1752     
+ Misses      14289    12340    -1949     
- Partials     2032     2235     +203     

Flag	Coverage Δ
cluster	44.87% <50.00%> (+8.79%)	⬆️
dm	26.20% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
playground	15.24% <ø> (-<0.01%)	⬇️
tiup	15.89% <ø> (ø)
unittest	22.70% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pkg/cluster/spec/tiflash.go	69.88% <ø> (+0.93%)	⬆️
pkg/cluster/operation/destroy.go	60.17% <50.00%> (+3.48%)	⬆️

... and 68 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[kaaaaaaang]

/merge

[ti-chi-bot]

@kaaaaaaang: /merge in this pull request requires 1 approval(s).

In response to this:

/merge

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.

[kaaaaaaang]

/merge

[ti-chi-bot]

This pull request has been accepted and is ready to merge.

Commit hash: 64ec3e8

[ti-chi-bot]

@hehechen: Your PR was out of date, I have automatically updated it for you.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the ti-community-infra/tichi repository.