JP2011199719A - Mobile communication terminal testing system and method of testing mobile communication terminal - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To reduce testing time by improving processing efficiency in replacing software.SOLUTION: A mobile communication terminal testing system includes a testing part to control a plurality of testing apparatuses with software to execute each type of test of the mobile communication terminals, and a test case storage part to store a plurality set of test cases, each contains operation settings including replacement of software for each testing apparatus. The testing part executes the tests while changing operation settings for the testing apparatuses in accordance with the test cases. A processing time difference from a difference between a maximum time and a minimum time for changing the operation settings throughout all test cases is calculated, based on the operation settings for each of the plurality of testing apparatuses included in the plurality of test cases. The plurality of test cases are sorted such that the time to change the operation settings is minimized throughout the test cases at least in an testing apparatus with the maximum processing time difference.

Description

  The present invention provides a mobile communication terminal test system and a test method for a mobile communication terminal that have a pseudo base station function capable of communication connection with a mobile communication terminal and perform a plurality of tests on the mobile communication terminal. The present invention relates to a technique for improving the efficiency of the entire test and reducing the test time by rearranging the order of executing the test.

  Among “Multiple Access” systems in which a plurality of users can talk at the same time, the “Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA)” system having excellent frequency utilization efficiency can be put into practical use by a plurality of methods. It was. Among these multiple systems, in particular, “Wideband-Code Division Multiple Access (W-CDMA)”, which is a system of the international standard IMT-2000 defined by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), is called “Wideband / Code Division Multiple Access”. There is a “connection” method, and mobile communication terminals using this connection method have been put into practical use. Furthermore, a next generation mobile communication standard called LTE (Long Term Evolution) is being formulated.

  Communication systems and data formats related to the above-described W-CDMA system and LTE system have been studied by 3GPP (3rd. Generation Partnership Project) and standardized as international standards. Mobile communication terminals and base station devices need to comply with this standard, and mobile communication terminal test systems for verifying compliance with this standard are provided.

  As an example of the mobile communication terminal test system, Patent Document 1 discloses a technique for specifying a necessary measuring device in accordance with a test to be performed when a mobile phone (mobile communication terminal) is tested. As can be seen from Patent Document 1, the test by the mobile communication terminal test system needs to be implemented by combining various test apparatuses (measuring instruments).

  The mobile communication terminal test system has test items (hereinafter referred to as “test cases”) corresponding to the functions and performance of one mobile communication terminal, and controls various test devices in accordance with the test items. Perform the test. Each test of the mobile communication terminal is managed by the mobile communication terminal test system as various test cases. One test case is generally a combination of a plurality of measurement devices (including operating conditions), and software (for example, a set) embedded in a measurement control device (generally a personal computer or the like is used). (Hereinafter referred to simply as “software”). In general, the expansion of the function of the test apparatus is handled by newly updating the incorporated software. For this reason, this software update is managed in a version and in combination with a test apparatus and a measurement apparatus. The management of these versions uniquely defines the functions and performance of the test apparatus and measurement control apparatus.

  On the other hand, the effectiveness of test case implementation is assured by a third party organization other than the test case creator certifying that the implementation conforms to laws or self-regulatory items. When this third party guarantees the effectiveness of the test case, the environment in which the test case was actually executed (hereinafter referred to as “test environment”), that is, the configuration of the test apparatus and the version of software incorporated in the test apparatus Are uniquely associated with the test case and guaranteed. Therefore, when a test is actually performed using a test case that is guaranteed to be effective, the test environment that is guaranteed to be effective must be reproduced and tested.

  For example, test case 1 is executed in a test environment in which version 1.01 software is incorporated in test apparatus A and version 3.03 software is incorporated in test apparatus B, and a third-party organization certifies test case 1 Suppose that Thereafter, when the certified supplier confirms the conformity to the standard of the mobile communication terminal using the certified test case 1, the test apparatus A incorporates software of version 1.01 and performs the test. The test must be performed only in the test environment in which the version 3.03 software is installed in the device B. At this time, when even one test environment configuration is different (for example, when the software incorporated in the test apparatus A is different from the version 1.01), compliance with the standard related to the test case 1 is not guaranteed.

  The test cases described above are newly added as the standards for mobile communication terminals are added or changed. For example, when it is possible to newly verify the conformity to the LTE standard, it is necessary to create a test case that can confirm the conformity to the LTE standard and to be certified by a third-party organization. At this time, if the software is modified in conformity with the new standard, the modified software cannot be used to execute the test case that is certified by the unmodified software. If the modified software is used in a test case that has already been certified, it is necessary to obtain a new third-party certification in a test environment that incorporates the modified software.

  There are hundreds of test cases, and the number increases as standards are added or changed. Therefore, in the mobile communication terminal test system, in general, for each test case, the test device used in the corresponding test and the version of software incorporated in the test device are associated with each other and managed as necessary. The configuration is such that the test is executed while replacing the software of the test apparatus.

  In other words, in such a mobile communication terminal test system, before executing a test, the version of software to be incorporated into each test apparatus is confirmed according to the test case, and the version of software required for the test case is replaced. So, we are managing to reproduce the test environment for executing test cases. For example, when reproducing the environment of the test case 1 described above, the test environment is reproduced by replacing the software of the test apparatus A with version 1.01 and the software of the test apparatus B with version 3.03. Become.

JP 2003-283446 A

  In a conventional mobile communication terminal test system, replacement of software incorporated in the test apparatus is manually performed for each test case by an operator who operates the test apparatus. This is a heavy burden on the operator. Further, when the software is manually replaced, there is a possibility that an incorrect version of the software is incorporated.

  For example, when executing test case 1, it is assumed that software of version 1.01 must be incorporated in test apparatus A. At this time, if a test is executed by mistakenly installing software of a different version (for example, version 1.73), compliance with the standard related to the test case 1 is not guaranteed. In this way, when software is manually replaced, it is difficult to prevent a situation in which an incorrect version of software is used as described above. This may lead to an accident in which certification is performed based on an incorrect result when confirming compliance with the standard of the mobile communication terminal to be tested.

  On the other hand, replacement of software incorporated in the test apparatus generally requires a process called downloading. Specifically, it is necessary to introduce software into the test apparatus from the outside and write the software into a storage area (for example, an internal nonvolatile memory) of the test apparatus. This process is generally a very time-consuming process depending on the capacity of the software to be downloaded.

  In recent years, technical specifications such as HSPA (High Speed Packet Access), which is an upper standard of W-CDMA, have been incorporated, and the scope of specifications has been added or changed, such as the establishment of LTE standards. New test cases have increased along with the addition / change of such standards, and the version of each software has also increased due to the addition of functions. Since the number of software replacements increases with the addition of versions, the time required for test replacement also increases and the test time tends to increase.

  The present invention solves the above-mentioned problem, and in the case where tests are continuously performed for a plurality of test cases, the processing is made efficient by reducing the number of times of software replacement, and the test time is shortened and error free. The purpose is to carry out the test.

In order to achieve the above object, the invention according to claim 1 is a test execution unit (10) that controls a plurality of test apparatuses having software and executes various tests of the mobile communication terminal (2) to be tested. ) And a test case storage unit (12) for storing a plurality of test cases, with the operation setting including replacement of the software for operating each of the plurality of test apparatuses as a set of test cases. An execution unit is a mobile communication terminal test system for executing the test while changing the operation setting of the test apparatus according to the test case, wherein the test unit includes three or more test cases, and the plurality of test cases are provided in advance. For each of the plurality of test apparatuses included in the test case, the time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases is maximized based on the operation setting. The maximum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged and the minimum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so that the time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases is minimized. The processing cost calculation unit (113) that calculates the processing time difference from the difference, and at least the test device with the largest processing time difference is specified, and the time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases based on that is minimized. As described above, an execution order determination unit (114) for rearranging the plurality of test cases is provided.
Further, the invention according to claim 2 is characterized in that the execution order determination unit is configured to minimize the time for changing the operation setting through all test cases in the test apparatus in which the processing time difference is minimized. Based on the execution order of the plurality of test cases when the test cases are rearranged, the plurality of test cases are rearranged in the order of the test apparatus with the smallest processing time difference, and the test cases are rearranged later. For the test apparatus that performs the above, the execution order of the plurality of test cases is based on the execution order of the test cases rearranged first and the operation setting corresponding to the test apparatus that rearranges the test cases later It is characterized by rearranging.
According to a third aspect of the present invention, there is provided a mobile communication terminal test system that controls a plurality of test devices having software and executes various tests of a mobile communication terminal to be tested. A test method for executing the test along the test case using an operation setting including replacement of the software for operating as a set of test cases, the plurality of test apparatuses included in the plurality of test cases Each time, based on the operation settings, the maximum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so as to maximize the time for changing the operation settings through all the test cases, and the operation settings through all the test cases. The difference in processing time is calculated from the difference from the minimum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so that the time to change is minimized. A processing time difference calculating step, and at least a rearranging step of rearranging the plurality of test cases so that a time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases is minimized in the test apparatus having the largest processing time difference. It is characterized by having.
The invention according to claim 4 is the test method according to claim 3, wherein, in the rearrangement step, the operation setting is changed through all test cases in the test apparatus in which the processing time difference is minimized. When the plurality of test cases are rearranged so as to minimize the time to perform, the plurality of test cases are rearranged in the order of the test devices with the smallest processing time difference based on the execution order of the plurality of test cases. And for the test apparatus that rearranges the test cases later, the execution order of the test cases rearranged earlier and the operation settings corresponding to the test apparatus that rearranges the test cases later. Based on the above, the execution order of the plurality of test cases is rearranged.

  The mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention performs software replacement when using different software between test cases when executing tests on a plurality of test cases. Execution order between test cases so that test cases using the same version of software are continuously executed for test devices with longer time required for software replacement (for example, test devices with larger software capacity) By rearranging, the number of software replacements is reduced. Thereby, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention can shorten the time required for software replacement and shorten the test time.

1 is a block diagram of a mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention. It is an example of the data which manages the response | compatibility of the test apparatus used by each test case, and the version of the software integrated in this test apparatus. It is an example of the processing cost in each test apparatus which a processing cost calculation part uses for calculation of a processing cost difference. It is a figure for demonstrating the process regarding the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on 1st Embodiment. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the process of the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating the process regarding the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on the modification 1. FIG. 6 is a flowchart for explaining processing of a mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 1;

(First embodiment)
For example, when the same software (same version) is used between consecutive test cases for software of a certain test apparatus, it is not necessary to replace this software. However, when using different ones (different versions) between consecutive test cases, it is necessary to replace this software. At this time, the time required for replacing the software varies depending on the software to be replaced and the test apparatus. Hereinafter, the time required for replacing the software for each test apparatus is referred to as “processing cost”. When executing a series of test cases, the sum of the processing costs for each test apparatus increases or decreases depending on the execution order between the test cases. This is because the number of times the software corresponding to the test apparatus is changed depends on the execution order between the test cases. In other words, depending on the execution order between test cases, the sum of processing costs may be maximized or minimized.

  In the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention, when a series of test cases are executed, a coefficient indicating the time range (distribution range) required for replacing the software of the test apparatus (hereinafter referred to as “processing cost difference”). ) Is calculated from the difference between the time when the processing time is maximum and the time when it is minimum. At this time, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention calculates a processing cost difference for each test apparatus (a specific method for calculating the processing cost difference will be described later).

  That is, it is shown that the test apparatus having a larger processing cost difference has a wider range of values that can be taken as the sum of processing costs depending on the execution order between test cases. In other words, a test device with a larger processing cost difference indicates that the test time can be shortened if the execution order between test cases is rearranged so that the number of software replacements is smaller. Yes. In the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention, the test apparatus with a larger processing cost difference reduces the overall test time by rearranging the execution order between test cases so that the number of software replacements is reduced. It is characterized by that.

  First, the configuration of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.

  The mobile communication terminal test system 1 is a mobile communication terminal test system that performs a test of the mobile communication terminal 2 to be tested, and mainly operates as a pseudo base station. The mobile communication terminal test system 1 includes a test execution unit 10, a test case execution control unit 11, a test case storage unit 12, and an operation unit 13.

  The test execution unit 10 includes a plurality of test devices (test devices A, B, or C) necessary for the test and a software storage unit (software storage unit A, B, or C) corresponding to each test device. The Examples of the test apparatus A, B, or C include a signal generator, a signal receiver, or a spectrum analyzer. In the software storage units A to C, software for operating the corresponding test apparatus is stored for each version. Specifically, software for operating the test apparatuses A to C is stored for each version.

  The test execution unit 10 controls a plurality of test apparatuses (test apparatuses A, B, or C) necessary for the test, and executes various tests of the mobile communication terminal 2. Note that, when it is necessary to replace the software of the test apparatus that executes the test with a different version of software, the test execution unit 10 causes the test apparatus to replace the software before executing the test. This software replacement is performed when the version of the software already incorporated in the corresponding test apparatus is different from the version of the software to be tested. For example, if the version of software used in a previously executed test case is different from the version of software associated with the next executed test case, the corresponding test device Software will be replaced.

  The test case storage unit 12 is a storage area for storing operation conditions set in each test apparatus for each test case as data (hereinafter, this data is referred to as “test case data”). Specifically, for example, when a signal generator is used as a test apparatus, a signal frequency such as 500 MHz or 1 GHz is stored in the test case data as an operation condition of the signal generator. The test case storage unit 12 stores test case data for each test condition to be executed.

  The operation unit 13 is a user interface for an operator to input conditions for a test executed in the mobile communication terminal test system 1. The test conditions include, for example, the frequency band of the signal generator, the output level of the signal output from each test apparatus, and the like.

  The test case execution control unit 11 includes a test execution control unit 111, a version management data storage unit 112, a processing cost calculation unit 113, and an execution order determination unit 114.

  The version management data storage unit 112 stores data (hereinafter referred to as “version management data”) indicating the correspondence between the test apparatus used in each test case and the version of software incorporated in the test apparatus. . That is, by referring to the version management data, the test apparatus used in one test case and the software incorporated in the test apparatus can be uniquely identified. The version management data storage unit 112 outputs version management data to the processing cost calculation unit 113 and the execution order determination unit 114 in response to an instruction from the test execution control unit 111 described later (the processing cost calculation unit 113 and the execution order determination unit). 114 will be described later). Note that software installed in each test apparatus or information (for example, software version) specifying the software corresponds to an operation setting for operating the test apparatus.

  FIG. 2 is an example of version management data. FIG. 2A is an example of version management data in the case where the relationship between each test apparatus and the software version is individually managed for each test case. FIG. 2B is an example of version management data when the relationship between the test apparatus used in each test case and the software version is managed in the form of a table.

  For example, in FIG. 2B, the version management data Cd2 of the test case Case2 indicates that the test apparatuses A to C are used in the test case Case2. At this time, the version of the software incorporated in each test apparatus indicates that the test apparatus A is 1.01, the test apparatus B is 2.13, and the test apparatus C is 1.42. 2A and 2B indicate that the corresponding test apparatus is not used in the test case. For example, the version management data Cd1 of the test case Case1 indicates that the test apparatuses A and B are used and the test apparatus C is not used. In such a case, any version of software may be incorporated into a test apparatus that is not used during execution of the test case.

  In the above description, the version management data is described as being stored in the version management data storage unit 112, but may be stored in the test case storage unit 12. In this case, for example, the version management data shown in FIGS. 2A and 2B may be managed in association with the test case data stored in the test case storage unit 12. Further, information corresponding to the version management data may be included in the test case data.

  The test execution control unit 111 extracts test case data from the test case storage unit 12 according to test conditions designated by the operator from the operation unit 13. When the test execution control unit 111 extracts the test case data, the test execution control unit 111 causes the processing cost calculation unit 113 to calculate the processing cost difference, and arranges the execution order between the test cases based on the processing cost difference calculated by the execution order determination unit 114. (The processing cost calculation unit 113 and the execution order determination unit 114 will be described later). The test execution control unit 111 sequentially reads the test cases rearranged by the execution order determination unit 114 and causes each test apparatus to execute a test via the test execution unit 10. This series of processing will be described in detail below.

  When the test execution control unit 111 extracts the test case data, the test execution control unit 111 instructs the processing cost calculation unit 113 to calculate a processing cost difference based on the extracted test case data. Further, the test execution control unit 111 instructs the version management data storage unit 112 to output version management data corresponding to the extracted test case data.

  The processing cost calculation unit 113 receives an instruction from the test case execution control unit 11 and calculates a processing cost difference between the test apparatuses when executing the extracted series of test case data. Hereinafter, processing related to calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 113 will be described with reference to FIGS. 3 and 4. FIG. 3 is an example of the processing cost in each test apparatus for the processing cost calculation unit 113 to calculate the processing cost difference. FIG. 4 is a diagram for explaining processing related to the rearrangement of the execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment, in each test case defined by version management data. The correspondence relationship between the test apparatus to be used and the version of software incorporated in the test apparatus is shown. FIG. 4A shows a state before the execution order between the test cases is rearranged.

  Note that the processing cost of each test apparatus shown in FIG. 3 may be stored in advance in a storage area provided in the processing cost calculation unit 113. In this case, the processing cost is stored in advance in the storage area of the processing cost calculation unit 113 for each version that can be incorporated into each test apparatus. As another method, the processing cost calculation unit 113 may be provided with a function for calculating the processing cost for each test apparatus. The function for calculating the processing cost is, for example, “test apparatus A”. “Since software replacement takes 3 seconds per 1 MB, the capacity of the version 1.31 software to be replaced is 0.9 GB. Then, it takes 45 minutes to replace the software ”. The above is an example of a function for calculating the processing cost, and the content of processing and parameters used in the processing differ depending on the test apparatus, software, and test environment (for example, communication environment).

  The processing cost calculation unit 113 first checks the test apparatus used in each test case and the version of software executed by the test apparatus based on the version management data stored in the version management data storage unit 112. .

  Next, when the processing cost calculation unit 113 rearranges the test cases for one test apparatus, when the one test apparatus is operated with respect to all the extracted test cases, the processing cost calculation unit 113 performs the test between the test cases. A time (hereinafter referred to as “maximum processing time”) and a minimum time (hereinafter referred to as “minimum processing time”) that is the sum of the time required for software replacement are calculated for each test apparatus. The calculation method of the maximum processing time and the minimum processing time by the processing cost calculation unit 113 will be specifically described below, taking as an example a case where “test apparatus A” is targeted as one test apparatus.

  First, the calculation method of the maximum processing time by the processing cost calculation unit 113 will be described in <A1> to <A3> shown below.

  <A1> First, the processing cost calculation unit 113 identifies the test case with the highest processing cost when changing to the version of software used in the next test case based on the initial state of one test case. The “initial state” indicates a state (software version already incorporated in each test apparatus) immediately before the test is executed by the operator specifying the test conditions.

  In FIG. 4A, the initial state of “test apparatus A” is 1.01. At this time, the process with the largest processing cost is confirmed from the processing cost (that is, the processing time) of the “test apparatus A” shown in FIG. At this time, when changing to 2.01, processing cost becomes the largest. As a result, the processing cost calculation unit 113 identifies Case 3 in which the software version of the “test apparatus A” is 2.01 from the test cases Case 1 to Case 6 in FIG. Place at the top of the order. Note that the processing cost when changing to a state in which “not used” is set is calculated as 0 minutes.

  <A2> Next, the processing cost calculation unit 113 performs the next test case based on the state of Case 3 arranged in the execution order between the test cases immediately before, that is, the software version 2.01 of the “test apparatus A”. A test case having the highest processing cost when changing to the version of software to be used is extracted from test cases (in this case, Case 1, Case 2, and Case 4 to Case 6) that are not yet arranged in the execution order between the test cases. . When Case 3 is used as a reference, the processing cost calculation unit 113 extracts Case 1 that sets “test apparatus A” to 1.31. The processing cost calculation unit 113 arranges the extracted Case 1 next to the reference test case (Case 3).

  After <A3>, the processing cost calculation unit 113 arranges all the test cases in the execution order between the test cases in the same manner as in <A2>. As a result, the test cases are rearranged so that the processing cost of the target test apparatus is maximized between consecutive test cases. When Case 1 to Case 6 shown in FIG. 4A are rearranged by this method, Case 3, Case 1, Case 2, Case 6, Case 5, and Case 4 are arranged in this order. The processing cost calculation unit 113 calculates the sum of the processing costs as the maximum processing time when operating the target test apparatus (that is, the test apparatus A) in the execution order between the test cases. In the case of “test apparatus A” in FIG. 4A, the maximum processing time is 220 minutes.

  Next, a method for calculating the minimum processing time by the processing cost calculation unit 113 will be described in <B1> to <B3> below. The concept of the minimum processing time calculation method by the processing cost calculation unit 113 is basically the same as the concept of the maximum processing time calculation method. That is, when calculating the minimum processing time, the test cases are rearranged so that the processing cost is minimized between consecutive test cases for the target test apparatus. At this time, the execution order between the test cases is rearranged so that test cases using the same version of software are continuously executed with respect to the target test apparatus on the basis of the initial state.

  <B1> First, the processing cost calculation unit 113 specifies the test case with the lowest processing cost when changing to the version of software used in the next test case based on the initial state of one test case.

  In FIG. 4A, the initial state of “test apparatus A” is 1.01. At this time, when the software of the “test apparatus A” is not replaced, the processing cost is the smallest. In this case, the processing cost for the test case for which “not used” is set or the test case for which the same version 1.01 is set is 0, which is the smallest. In this case, the processing cost calculation unit 113 first specifies a test case for which “not used” is set with priority. Therefore, the processing cost calculation unit 113 uses the “test apparatus A” from the test cases Case 1 to Case 6 in FIG. 4A based on the processing cost of the “test apparatus A” illustrated in FIG. Case 4 not to be extracted is placed at the top of the execution order between test cases.

  If neither the test case where “not used” is set nor the test case where 1.01 which is the same version is set, the processing cost calculation unit 113 determines in FIG. With reference to the processing cost of the test apparatus A shown, the test case with the lowest processing cost is specified.

  <B2> Next, the processing cost calculation unit 113 has the lowest processing cost when changing to the version of software used in the next test case based on the Case 4 state that is arranged in the execution order between the test cases immediately before. Are extracted from test cases (in this case, Case 1 and Case 3 to Case 6) that are not yet arranged in the execution order between the test cases. At this time, since the software version of the “test apparatus A” has not been changed from the initial state, 1.01 is set. At this time, since there is no test case in which “not used” is set, the processing cost calculation unit 113 extracts Case 2 that sets the software version of “test apparatus A” to 1.01. The processing cost calculation unit 113 arranges the extracted Case 2 next to the test case (Case 4) as a reference.

  After <B3>, the processing cost calculation unit 113 arranges all the test cases in the execution order between the test cases in the same manner as in <B2>. When Case 1 to Case 6 shown in FIG. 4A are rearranged by this method, Case 4, Case 2, Case 5, Case 1, Case 6, and Case 3 are arranged in this order. The sum of the processing costs when the target test apparatus (that is, the test apparatus A) is operated in the execution order between the test cases is calculated as the minimum processing time. In the case of “test apparatus A” in FIG. 4A, the minimum processing time is 95 minutes.

  Next, the processing cost calculation unit 113 calculates a difference between the calculated maximum processing time and minimum processing time as a processing cost difference. This processing cost difference corresponds to the processing time difference. For example, in the case of “test apparatus A”, the processing cost difference is (maximum processing time−minimum processing time) = (220 minutes−95 minutes) = 125 minutes.

  The processing cost calculation unit 113 calculates the maximum processing time and the minimum processing time for the other test apparatuses in the same manner as the test apparatus A by the methods shown in <A1> to <A3> and <B1> to <B3>. The processing cost difference is calculated from the difference between the calculated maximum processing time and the minimum processing time. In the case of FIG. 4A, the processing cost difference of “test apparatus B” is 65 minutes, and the processing cost difference of “test apparatus C” is 20 minutes. The processing cost calculation unit 113 notifies the execution order determination unit 114 of the processing cost difference calculated for each test apparatus. Note that the processing related to the calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 113 described above corresponds to a processing time difference calculation step.

  The execution order determination unit 114 receives the processing cost difference corresponding to each test device from the processing cost calculation unit 113, and specifies the test device having the largest processing cost difference. In the case of FIG. 4A, the processing cost difference (125 minutes) of “test apparatus A” is the highest. Therefore, the execution order determination unit 114 specifies “test apparatus A”.

  The execution order determination unit 114 rearranges the test cases so that the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases is minimized for the test apparatus with the largest difference in the processing costs. The process related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases at this time is the same as the process related to the rearrangement of the test cases in the case of obtaining the minimum processing time described above. Therefore, the execution order between test cases obtained at the time of deriving the minimum processing time may be used. In this case, it is not necessary to cause the execution order determining unit 114 to newly execute the process for obtaining the execution order between the test cases for deriving the minimum processing time shown in <B1> to <B3>.

  FIG. 4B shows the result of rearranging the test cases shown in FIG. 4A for the “test apparatus A”. Thereby, the execution order between the test cases is rearranged so that the test cases using the same version of software are continuously executed for the “test apparatus A”. Note that the processing related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases by the execution order determination unit 114 described above corresponds to the rearrangement step.

  Next, the test execution control unit 111 sequentially reads test case data and version management data corresponding to the test cases whose execution order has been rearranged by the execution order determination unit 114. When the test execution control unit 111 reads the version management data, the test execution control unit 111 checks the version of the software already incorporated in each test apparatus. The test execution control unit 111 replaces software in the test apparatus via the test execution unit 10 when the software version already incorporated in the test apparatus is different from the software version specified by the read version management data. Instruct. If the version of the software already incorporated in the test apparatus is the same as the version of the software specified by the read version management data, the test apparatus is not instructed to replace the software.

  When the replacement of the software of the test apparatus is completed, the test execution control unit 111 causes each test apparatus to change the operation condition via the test execution unit 10 based on the read test case data. When the change of the operating condition is completed, the test execution control unit 111 causes each test apparatus to execute a test via the test execution unit 10. Thereafter, the test execution control unit 111 executes the above-described software confirmation and replacement processing and processing related to operation condition change and test execution for all test cases.

  Next, processing of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 5 is a flowchart for explaining processing of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment.

(Step S01)
First, the test execution control unit 111 extracts test case data from the test case storage unit 12 according to the test conditions designated by the operator from the operation unit 13.

(Step S02)
When the test execution control unit 111 extracts the test case data, the test execution control unit 111 instructs the processing cost calculation unit 113 to calculate a processing cost difference based on the extracted test case data. The processing cost calculation unit 113 receives the instruction from the test execution control unit 111, and based on the processing cost of each test apparatus, the maximum time required to replace the software between successive test cases is maximized. The processing time and the minimum minimum processing time are calculated. The processing cost calculation unit 113 calculates the processing cost difference from the difference between the calculated maximum processing time and minimum processing time for each test apparatus. The processing related to the calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 113 corresponds to a processing time difference calculation step.

(Step S03)
Next, the execution order determination unit 114 receives the processing cost difference corresponding to each test device from the processing cost calculation unit 113, and specifies the test device having the largest processing cost difference. For example, in the case of FIG. 4A, the processing cost difference (125 minutes) of “test apparatus A” is the highest. Therefore, the execution order determination unit 114 specifies “test apparatus A”.

(Step S04)
Next, the execution order determination unit 114 rearranges the test cases so that the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases becomes the minimum for the test apparatus with the largest difference in the processing costs. For example, when the test cases are rearranged for the “test apparatus A”, FIG. 4A is set to the state before the execution order is rearranged between the test cases, and the arrangement as shown in FIG. The result of replacement will be obtained. Note that the processing related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases by the execution order determination unit 114 described above corresponds to the rearrangement step.

(Step S05)
Next, the test execution control unit 111 sequentially reads test case data and version management data corresponding to the test cases whose execution order has been rearranged by the execution order determination unit 114. When the test execution control unit 111 reads the version management data, the test execution control unit 111 checks the version of the software already incorporated in each test apparatus. When the software version already incorporated in the test apparatus is different from the software version specified by the read version management data, the test execution control unit 111 replaces the software with the test apparatus via the test execution unit 10. Instruct.

  When the replacement of the software of the test apparatus is completed, the test execution control unit 111 causes each test apparatus to change the operation condition via the test execution unit 10 based on the read test case data. When the change of the operating condition is completed, the test execution control unit 111 causes each test apparatus to execute a test via the test execution unit 10. Thereafter, the test execution control unit 111 executes the above-described software confirmation and replacement processing and processing related to operation condition change and test execution for all test cases.

  As described above, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment specifies the test apparatus having the largest processing cost difference between the test cases extracted from the operation unit 13 according to the test conditions specified by the operator. The mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment rearranges the execution order between test cases so that test cases using the same version of software are continuously executed for the specified test apparatus. As a result, for the test apparatus having the largest processing cost difference, the time required for the software replacement becomes shorter, and the overall test time can be shortened.

  Further, in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment, the software is switched to each test apparatus according to the test case to be executed based on the version management data. As a result, it is possible to prevent a setting error of the software of each test apparatus and to prevent the occurrence of an accident that makes an authorization based on an incorrect result.

  It is not always necessary to calculate the processing cost difference for all test apparatuses as described above. A test apparatus that is known in advance that the effect of reducing the test time is small even if the execution order between test cases is changed, so that the processing cost calculation unit 113 can be excluded from the processing target related to the calculation of the processing cost difference. (In other words, the processing cost calculation unit 113 calculates the processing cost difference only for a part of predetermined test apparatuses). In this case, the execution order determination unit 114 specifies the test apparatus that is the target of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases from the test apparatuses that calculated the processing cost difference. Thereby, in the process related to the calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 113, the calculation amount can be reduced and the processing time can be shortened.

(Modification 1)
The execution order determination unit 114 according to the first embodiment receives the processing cost difference of each test device calculated by the processing cost calculation unit 113, and executes between test cases for the test device having the highest processing cost difference. The order was rearranged.

  In the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first modification, the execution order between the test cases is set so that the test cases using the same version of software are continuously executed even for a test apparatus other than the test apparatus having the largest processing cost difference. Rearranges. At this time, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 1 assigns priorities among the test apparatuses based on the processing cost difference, and sets the test case as a target of sorting (specific processing contents). Will be described later). Hereinafter, the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 1 will be described.

  The mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 1 is different from the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment in the processing contents of the execution order determination unit 114. In this description, the processing contents of the execution order determination unit 114a different from the first embodiment will be described. The configuration and processing contents of the other processing blocks are the same as those in the first embodiment, and a specific description thereof will be omitted.

  The operation of the execution order determination unit 114a according to Modification 1 will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 6 is a diagram for explaining processing relating to rearrangement of the execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first modification. The execution order determination unit 114 a receives the processing cost difference corresponding to each test apparatus from the processing cost calculation unit 113. For example, FIG. 6A shows a state before the execution order between test cases is changed. FIG. 6A shows the same state as FIG. Therefore, the processing cost difference between the test devices calculated by the processing cost calculation unit 113 based on the processing cost of each test device shown in FIG. 3 is 125 for “test device A” as in FIG. Minutes, “test apparatus B” is 65 minutes, and “test apparatus C” is 20 minutes.

  The execution order determination unit 114a receives the processing cost difference corresponding to each test device from the processing cost calculation unit 113, and targets each test device in order of increasing processing cost difference between the test cases consecutive for each test device. The execution order between the test cases is sequentially rearranged so that the sum of the processing costs is minimized. Specific processing related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases of the execution order determination unit 114a will be described in <C1> to <C4> below with reference to FIG.

  <C1> First, the execution order determination unit 114a compares the processing cost differences of the test devices and identifies the test device with the smallest processing cost difference. In the case of FIG. 6A, since the processing cost difference of “test apparatus C” is the smallest, the execution order determination unit 114a specifies “test apparatus C”.

  <C2> Next, the execution order determination unit 114a targets the specified test apparatus (in this case, “test apparatus C”) as a target so that the sum of processing costs between successive test cases is minimized. , Sort each test case. FIG. 6B shows the state before execution of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases in FIG. 6A, and the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases for the “test apparatus C” is minimized. As shown, the results when the test cases are rearranged are shown. The method of rearranging the execution order between test cases so that the sum of the processing costs between the test cases is minimized is the process related to the rearrangement of the test cases in the case of obtaining the minimum processing time described above. It is the same. Therefore, the execution order between test cases obtained at the time of deriving the minimum processing time may be used. In this case, it is not necessary for the execution order determination unit 114a to newly execute the process for obtaining the execution order between the test cases for deriving the minimum processing time shown in <B1> to <B3>.

  <C3> Next, the execution order determination unit 114a specifies the test apparatus with the smallest processing cost difference next to the test apparatus that is the target of rearrangement between the test cases immediately before. When the test apparatus that is the target of rearrangement between test cases immediately before is “test apparatus C”, the test apparatus with the next smallest processing cost difference is “test apparatus B”. Therefore, at this time, the execution order determination unit 114a specifies “test apparatus B”.

  When the test device having a small processing cost difference is specified, the execution order determination unit 114a rearranges the test cases for the specified test device so that the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases is minimized. At this time, the execution order determination unit 114a rearranges each test case with the execution order between the test cases rearranged immediately before as the state before the rearrangement for the specified test apparatus is performed. FIG. 6C shows the state before execution of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases, and the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases for “test apparatus B” is minimized. As shown, the results when the test cases are rearranged are shown.

  After <C4>, the execution order determination unit 114a rearranges the execution order between the test cases for the remaining test apparatuses in the order of small processing cost difference in the same manner as in <C3>. That is, the execution order determination unit 114a rearranges the execution order between the test cases for “test apparatus A” after “test apparatus B”. For example, FIG. 6D shows the state before execution of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases in FIG. 6C, and the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases for “test apparatus A”. The result when each test case is rearranged so that is minimized is shown.

  In the above description, an example has been described in which the execution order determination unit 114a rearranges the execution order between test cases for all test apparatuses for which the processing cost difference has been calculated. However, it is not always necessary to rearrange the execution order between test cases for all test apparatuses. A test apparatus with a small processing cost difference has little effect on reducing test time even if the execution order between test cases is rearranged as a target. For this reason, the test apparatus that is the target of the test case rearrangement may be specified before the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases. At this time, only test devices having a processing cost difference equal to or greater than a predetermined value may be extracted as objects to be rearranged. Alternatively, a predetermined number of test devices may be extracted in order of increasing processing cost difference.

  For example, taking FIG. 6A as an example, when a test apparatus having a processing cost difference of 60 minutes or more is extracted as an object, the test apparatuses to be rearranged test cases are “test apparatus A” and “test apparatus”. B ". Similarly, in the example of FIG. 6A, when the top two test devices with the difference in processing cost are extracted, the test devices for which the test cases are rearranged are “test device A” and “test device B”. It becomes.

  In addition, when there is a test apparatus that does not calculate the processing cost difference, the execution order determination unit 114a does not rearrange the execution order between test cases for the test apparatus. This test apparatus corresponds to the test apparatus that is excluded from the processing target related to the calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 113 described above.

  Next, the test execution control unit 111 sequentially reads test case data and version management data corresponding to the test cases whose execution order has been rearranged by the execution order determination unit 114. Thereafter, similarly to the first embodiment, the process related to the software replacement of each test apparatus and the process related to the change of the operating condition and the execution of the test are executed for each test case.

  Next, the process of the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 1 will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 5 is a flowchart for explaining processing of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment. Note that the processing related to step S01 and step S02 is the same as that in the first embodiment, and thus the description thereof will be omitted.

(Step S11)
After the processing cost calculation unit 113 calculates the processing cost difference, the execution order determination unit 114a then arranges the execution order between the test cases based on the processing cost difference of each test apparatus calculated by the processing cost calculation unit 113. The processing related to replacement is started. At this time, the execution order determination unit 114a may extract test devices to be rearranged in advance based on the processing cost difference.

(Step S12)
Next, the execution order determination unit 114a compares the processing cost differences between the test devices and identifies the test device with the smallest processing cost difference. For example, in the case of FIG. 6A, the execution order determination unit 114a specifies “test apparatus C”.

(Step S13)
Next, the execution order determination unit 114a rearranges each test case so that the sum of processing costs between successive test cases is minimized for the specified test apparatus. For example, when the test cases are rearranged for the “test apparatus C”, FIG. 6A is the state before the execution order is rearranged between the test cases, and the arrangement as shown in FIG. The result of replacement will be obtained.

(Step S14)
Next, the execution order determination unit 114a confirms whether the test cases for the extracted test apparatuses have been rearranged for all the extracted test apparatuses.

(Step S15)
When there is still a test device that is not the target of rearrangement (step S14, N), the execution order determination unit 114a identifies the test device with the smallest processing cost difference from the test devices that are not the target of rearrangement. To do. For example, after rearranging the execution order between test cases for “test apparatus C”, the execution order determination unit 114a selects “test apparatus B” with the smallest processing cost difference after “test apparatus C”. Will be identified.

  When the test device is specified, the execution order determination unit 114a rearranges the execution order between the test cases again for the specified test device. At this time, the execution order determination unit 114a sets the execution order between the test cases rearranged immediately before to the state before performing the rearrangement for the specified test apparatus, and rearranges the execution order between the test cases. . For example, if the execution order between the test cases is rearranged for the “test apparatus C”, first, the execution order determination unit 114a performs FIG. 6B before rearranging the execution order between the test cases. State. Next, the execution order determination unit 114a rearranges the test cases for the “test apparatus B” so that the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases is minimized. FIG. 6C corresponds to the result of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases for “test apparatus B” by the execution order determination unit 114a.

(Step S05)
When rearrangement is performed for all the test apparatuses (step S14, Y), the execution order determination unit 114a ends the process related to the rearrangement of test cases. Note that the processing related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases by the execution order determination unit 114 described above corresponds to the rearrangement step.

  Next, the test execution control unit 111 sequentially reads out test case data and version management data corresponding to the test cases whose execution order has been rearranged by the execution order determination unit 114a. When the test execution control unit 111 reads the version management data, the test execution control unit 111 checks the version of the software already incorporated in each test apparatus. When the software version already incorporated in the test apparatus is different from the software version specified by the read version management data, the test execution control unit 111 replaces the software with the test apparatus via the test execution unit 10. Instruct.

  When the replacement of the software of the test apparatus is completed, the test execution control unit 111 causes each test apparatus to change the operation condition via the test execution unit 10 based on the read test case data. When the change of the operating condition is completed, the test execution control unit 111 causes each test apparatus to execute a test via the test execution unit 10. Thereafter, the test execution control unit 111 executes the above-described software confirmation and replacement processing and processing related to operation condition change and test execution for all test cases.

  Here, regarding the result of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first modification and the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment are shown in FIG. The comparison is made with reference to FIG. FIG. 4B shows a result of rearranging the execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment. FIG. 6D shows the result of rearranging the execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first modification.

  For example, when the software versions are compared between FIG. 4B and FIG. 6D for the “test apparatus A” with the largest processing cost difference, both are in the same order. For this reason, the processing time for “test apparatus A” is the same in FIG. 4B and FIG. 6D. However, paying attention to the “test apparatus B” shown in FIG. 4B, the execution order of the test cases Case4, Case2, and Case5 is changed to the execution order of Case4, Case5, and Case2 as shown in FIG. When changed, the timing of software replacement for “test apparatus B” decreases from twice to once.

  Based on the processing cost of the “test apparatus B” shown in FIG. 3B, the processing cost related to the change of the operating condition when processing Case 2, Case 4, and Case 5 on the basis of the initial state is calculated. According to this calculation result, the processing cost of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first modification is reduced by 20 minutes compared to the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment. Specifically, the processing cost between Case 4 and Case 2 in FIG. 6D from the sum of processing costs between Case 4 and Case 2 and between Case 2 and Case 5 in FIG. 4B (45 minutes). (25 minutes).

  As described above, in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 1, the test cases that use the same version of software are continuously executed even for test devices other than the test device having the largest processing cost difference. Rearrange the order. As a result, the entire test time is further reduced than when the execution order between the test cases is rearranged only for the test apparatus having the largest processing cost difference (the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment). It becomes possible to do.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Mobile communication terminal test system 2 Mobile communication terminal 10 Test execution part 11 Test case execution control part 12 Test case storage part 13 Operation part 111 Test execution control part 112 Version management data storage part 113 Processing cost calculation part 114, 114a Execution Order determination part

Claims (4)

A test execution unit (10) for controlling a plurality of test devices having software and executing various tests of the mobile communication terminal (2) to be tested; and a software for operating each of the plurality of test devices. A test case storage unit (12) for storing a plurality of test cases, with the operation settings including replacement as a set of test cases, and the test execution unit changing the operation settings of the test apparatus according to the test cases A mobile communication terminal test system for executing the test,
3 or more of the plurality of test cases are provided,
For each of the plurality of test apparatuses included in the plurality of test cases, the plurality of test cases are rearranged so as to maximize the time for changing the operation settings through all the test cases based on the operation settings. The processing cost for calculating the processing time difference from the difference between the maximum processing time in the case of the test and the minimum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so that the time for changing the operation setting is minimized through all the test cases A calculation unit (113);
An execution order determination unit (114) that identifies at least the test apparatus having the largest processing time difference and rearranges the plurality of test cases so that the time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases is minimized based on the test apparatus. And a mobile communication terminal test system.   The plurality of test cases when the execution order determining unit rearranges the plurality of test cases so that the time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases is minimized in the test apparatus in which the processing time difference is minimized. Based on the execution order of the test cases, the test devices that rearrange the plurality of test cases in the order of the test devices with the smallest processing time difference and rearrange the test cases later are arranged first. 2. The execution order of the plurality of test cases is rearranged based on an execution order of the changed test cases and an operation setting corresponding to the test apparatus for rearranging the test cases later. The mobile communication terminal test system according to 1. In a mobile communication terminal test system that controls a plurality of test apparatuses having software and executes various tests of a mobile communication terminal to be tested, an operation including replacement of the software for operating each of the plurality of test apparatuses A test method for setting the set as a set of test cases and executing the test along the test cases,
For each of the plurality of test devices included in the plurality of test cases, the plurality of test cases are rearranged so as to maximize the time for changing the operation settings through all the test cases based on the operation settings. A processing time difference calculating step for calculating a processing time difference from a difference between a maximum processing time and a minimum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so as to minimize the time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases; ,
At least in the test apparatus with the largest processing time difference, the test apparatus further comprises a rearranging step for rearranging the plurality of test cases so that the time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases is minimized. Test method.   In the rearrangement step, the plurality of test cases when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so that the time for changing the operation setting through all the test cases is minimized in the test apparatus in which the processing time difference is minimum. Based on the test case execution order, the plurality of test cases are rearranged in the order of the test devices with the smallest processing time difference, and the test devices that rearrange the test cases later are rearranged first. 4. The order of execution of the plurality of test cases is rearranged based on the execution order of the test cases determined and an operation setting corresponding to the test apparatus that rearranges the test cases later. 5. Test method described.

Images