[JoyC-dev]

close #67623

What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #67623

Problem Summary:

What changed and how does it work?

Check List

Tests

• Unit test
• Integration test
• Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
• No need to test

  • I checked and no code files have been changed.

Side effects

• Performance regression: Consumes more CPU
• Performance regression: Consumes more Memory
• Breaking backward compatibility

Documentation

• Affects user behaviors
• Contains syntax changes
• Contains variable changes
• Contains experimental features
• Changes MySQL compatibility

Release note

Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.

None

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Updated GCS service account credential handling in backup and restore tests.
  • Refactored GCS endpoint configuration for backup and restore operations.
  • Made legacy GCS backup/restore testing conditional via environment flag.

[ti-chi-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign bornchanger for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.
Please ensure that each of them provides their approval before proceeding.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• br/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request fixes GCS integration test failures by adding required credential fields (project_id and private_key_id) to generated service account JSON and updating GCS endpoint parameters to exclude the /storage/v1/ path suffix. Legacy brv4.0.8 backup/restore tests are now gated behind a conditional environment variable.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
br_gcs Integration Test br/tests/br_gcs/run.sh	Added project_id and private_key_id to generated GCS credentials JSON. Changed backup/restore endpoint from http://$GCS_HOST:$GCS_PORT/storage/v1/ to http://$GCS_HOST:$GCS_PORT. Made legacy brv4.0.8 backup/restore conditional on TEST_LEGACY_BR_GCS=true.
docker_compatible_gcs Test Suite br/tests/docker_compatible_gcs/_run.sh, br/tests/docker_compatible_gcs/prepare.sh	Added project_id and private_key_id fields to generated GCS service account credentials. Removed /storage/v1/ suffix from GCS endpoint parameter in backup and restore invocations.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• br: fix fake-gcs test #67645 — Applies identical code-level changes to GCS test scripts for credential field additions and endpoint URL format standardization.
• br: fix fake-gcs test on feature/fts | tidb-test=13ccf8de48e8db2290ff884598444d0508606bbf tiflash=feature-fts #68018 — Implements the same credential JSON and endpoint modifications across GCS test infrastructure.

Suggested labels

contribution, size/M, type/cherry-pick-for-release-8.5, ok-to-test

Suggested reviewers

• wshwsh12
• wjhuang2016
• Leavrth

Poem

🐰 A rabbit hops through GCS with glee,
With private_key_id now in spree,
No more /storage/v1/ in sight,
The endpoints gleam, tests run just right!
Legacy flows bow politely away,
Infrastructure fixed for a brighter test day! 🎉

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The PR description links issue #67623 but lacks implementation details, test information, and problem summary; only the template structure is present with no substantive content.	Add Problem Summary explaining the issue, What changed describing the solution, and mark appropriate checklist items to document testing and side effects.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The changes add missing private_key_id and private_key fields to GCS credentials and update endpoint parameters to root URLs, directly addressing issue #67623's requirement for successful fake GCS backup/restore.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All modifications in br/tests/ are focused on GCS test credential generation and endpoint parameter updates for the fake GCS endpoint, with no unrelated changes detected.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title directly addresses the main change: fixing the fake-gcs test. The summary confirms the PR fixes GCS credential JSON generation and endpoint handling in BR tests.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

Tip

💬 Introducing Slack Agent: The best way for teams to turn conversations into code.

Slack Agent is built on CodeRabbit's deep understanding of your code, so your team can collaborate across the entire SDLC without losing context.

• Generate code and open pull requests
• Plan features and break down work
• Investigate incidents and troubleshoot customer tickets together
• Automate recurring tasks and respond to alerts with triggers
• Summarize progress and report instantly

Built for teams:

• Shared memory across your entire org—no repeating context
• Per-thread sandboxes to safely plan and execute work
• Governance built-in—scoped access, auditability, and budget controls

One agent for your entire SDLC. Right inside Slack.

👉 Get started

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[tiprow]

Hi @JoyC-dev. Thanks for your PR.

PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test all.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

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 kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (release-8.5-20260116-v8.5.5@4f911ef). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                       Coverage Diff                        @@
##             release-8.5-20260116-v8.5.5     #68126   +/-   ##
================================================================
  Coverage                               ?   55.0506%           
================================================================
  Files                                  ?       1821           
  Lines                                  ?     653012           
  Branches                               ?          0           
================================================================
  Hits                                   ?     359487           
  Misses                                 ?     266811           
  Partials                               ?      26714           

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	38.2599% <ø> (?)
unit	64.9860% <ø> (?)

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

Components	Coverage Δ
dumpling	52.9278% <0.0000%> (?)
parser	∅ <0.0000%> (?)
br	55.5180% <0.0000%> (?)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[JoyC-dev]

/retest

[tiprow]

@JoyC-dev: PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test.

Details

In response to this:

/retest

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 kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[JoyC-dev]

/retest

[tiprow]

@JoyC-dev: PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test.

Details

In response to this:

/retest

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 kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[JoyC-dev]

/retest

[tiprow]

@JoyC-dev: PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test.

Details

In response to this:

/retest

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 kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[jebter]

/test pull-br-integration-test

[tiprow]

@jebter: PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test.

Details

In response to this:

/test pull-br-integration-test

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 kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[jebter]

/test pull-br-integration-test

[tiprow]

@jebter: PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with /ok-to-test in this repo meaning untrusted PR authors can never trigger tests themselves. Collaborators can still trigger tests on the PR using /test.

Details

In response to this:

/test pull-br-integration-test

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 kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[ti-chi-bot]

@JoyC-dev: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-br-integration-test	d7bc0c8	link	true	/test pull-br-integration-test

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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 kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[jebter]

Packed into #68216