JP5112463B2 - Mobile communication terminal test system and mobile communication terminal test method - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to a mobile communication terminal test system and a mobile communication terminal test method that have a pseudo base station function capable of communication connection with a mobile communication terminal and perform a plurality of verifications 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 one system of the international standard IMT-2000 defined by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), is called “Wideband / Code Division Multiplexing”. 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).

  Each test of the mobile communication terminal is managed as a test case by the mobile communication terminal test system. The test case includes a test execution procedure for actually executing a test, a pre-processing procedure for constructing a test environment before the test execution procedure, and a post-processing procedure executed after the test execution procedure.

  The pre-processing procedure is composed of one or more pre-processing items. The pre-processing item indicates a function executed by each test apparatus in order to change the operation condition of each test apparatus according to the test condition. Each test apparatus changes the operating condition according to the parameter by executing the pre-processing item with a specific parameter (for example, an output level in the signal transmitter, etc.) set in the test apparatus according to the test condition as an input. Hereinafter, this parameter is referred to as a processing parameter.

  Further, the preprocessing items include those having a dependency relationship with other preprocessing items executed before. It is necessary to execute each preprocessing item according to a specific order between the preprocessing items having the dependency. For example, the signal receiver may fail due to a high power level signal transmitted from the signal transmitter toward the signal receiver before the sensitivity of the signal receiver is appropriately adjusted. In this case, it is necessary to adjust the sensitivity of the signal receiver first. In order to avoid the occurrence of such a problem, a dependency relationship may be set between each pre-processing item. Therefore, it is not possible to change the execution order of the preprocessing items constituting the preprocessing procedure.

  The post-processing procedure is for returning the operating conditions of each test apparatus changed in the pre-processing procedure to the initial state or a predetermined known operating condition (hereinafter, these may be collectively referred to as “default state”). It is a procedure. The list of tests executed as tests of the mobile communication terminal is not necessarily constant, and the execution order of each test is not uniquely determined. Therefore, a post-processing procedure is provided so that each test apparatus is returned to a predetermined state after the test is executed so that the next test is correctly executed without being limited to the execution order.

  The post-processing procedure is composed of one or more post-processing items for returning the operating condition of each test apparatus to a predetermined state corresponding to each pre-processing item. The post-processing item indicates a function executed in each test apparatus in order to return the operation condition of each test apparatus changed by the pre-process item to a predetermined state. Each test apparatus returns the operating condition to the default state by executing the post-processing item with the processing parameter for returning the operating condition of each test apparatus changed in the preprocessing item to the default state as an input.

  The execution order of post-processing items is determined corresponding to the execution order of pre-processing items. Specifically, the execution order is determined so that post-processing items corresponding to pre-processing items executed earlier are executed later. For this reason, the execution order of the post-processing items constituting the post-processing procedure cannot be changed in the same manner as the execution order of the pre-processing items. Hereinafter, the pre-processing item and the post-processing item may be collectively referred to as “processing item”.

  Next, the configuration of a conventional mobile communication terminal test system will be described below with reference to FIG. FIG. 12 is a system block diagram showing an example of a system configuration of a conventional mobile communication terminal test system.

  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 11a, a test case storage unit 12, and an operation unit 13.

  The test execution unit 10 controls a plurality of test apparatuses (test apparatuses A, B, or C in FIG. 12) necessary for the test, and executes various tests of the mobile communication terminal 2. Examples of the test apparatus A, B, or C include a signal generator, a signal receiver, or a spectrum analyzer.

  The test execution unit 10 also controls the operation of a device connected to the outside of the mobile communication terminal test system 1 when the test is executed. Examples of the externally connected device include a temperature management device 3 that adjusts the temperature of the test environment, a power supply device 4 that supplies power to the mobile communication terminal 2, or a vibration device 5 that vibrates the mobile communication terminal. Etc.

  The test case storage unit 12 stores a processing parameter for executing each process of the pre-processing procedure or the post-processing procedure for each test case as data (hereinafter, this data is referred to as “test case data”). It is an area. The test case storage unit 12 stores test case data for each test condition to be executed.

  FIG. 13 shows an example of test case data in the mobile communication terminal test system 1. In FIG. 13, D1 represents a pre-processing procedure, D2 represents an execution processing procedure, D3 represents a post-processing procedure, D4 represents a pre-processing item, and D5 represents a post-processing item. Further, “function” in FIG. 13 corresponds to “processing item”. As described above, the test case data includes the processing parameters for causing each test apparatus to execute the pre-processing item, the execution processing procedure, and the post-processing item constituting the test case. Note that the processing parameter with * 1 indicates a processing parameter for returning the operating condition changed based on the value in the parenthesis by the corresponding preprocessing item to the default state.

  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, or the temperature setting of the test environment.

  The test case execution control unit 11a extracts test case data corresponding to the test conditions from the test case storage unit 12 according to the test conditions specified by the operator from the operation unit 13. Thereafter, the test case execution control unit 11a sequentially reads the extracted test case data, and based on the processing parameters of each processing item set in the test case data, the pre-processing procedure and test are performed via the test execution unit 10. Each test apparatus is made to perform an execution procedure and a post-processing procedure. Depending on the test mode, a plurality of types of test cases may be continuously executed, or a specific test case may be repeatedly executed.

JP 2003-283446 A

  In recent years, technical specifications such as HSPA (High Speed Packet Access), which is a higher standard of W-CDMA, have been incorporated, LTE standards have been formulated, and the scope of specifications has been added and changed, and test cases have increased accordingly. However, the test time tends to be long.

  On the other hand, there is a test case in which a test is performed between a plurality of test cases with the same configuration (using the same test apparatus under the same operating conditions). In this case, in order to construct the same test environment, the same processing items (pre-processing items and post-processing items) are executed each time in both test cases as the pre-processing procedure and the post-processing procedure. This same processing item is executed for each test case, thereby redundantly increasing the test time.

  The present invention solves the above problem, and aims to shorten the test time by improving the efficiency of the execution of the processing items common to the respective test cases.

In order to achieve the above object, the invention described in claim 1 includes a test execution unit (10) that controls a plurality of test apparatuses and executes various tests of a mobile communication terminal (2) to be tested; In the pre-stage of the test, a plurality of pre-processing items in which processing for setting the plurality of test apparatuses from respective known operating conditions to operating conditions according to the contents of the various tests is divided into items by execution units. A plurality of tests executed in a reverse order of the pre-processing procedure, a pre-processing procedure arranged in the order of execution, an execution processing procedure for executing the test itself, and executed after the execution processing procedure. A test case storage unit (12) that stores a plurality of test cases of three or more by using a post-processing procedure in which a plurality of post-processing items for returning the operating conditions of the apparatus to the known operating conditions are arranged as a set of test cases. And the test A mobile communication terminal test system in which an execution unit executes the test along the test case, and the pre-processing items in the plurality of test cases are preliminarily set as the one pre-processing of each test case. Based on the operation condition corresponding to the item, the maximum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so that the processing time for all test cases is maximized, and the processing time for all test cases is minimum. A processing cost calculation unit (1112) for calculating a processing time difference from a difference from a minimum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged, and at least the minimum processing for the preprocessing item having the largest processing time difference An execution order determination unit (1111) that rearranges the order of the plurality of test cases as an execution order so as to become time; After rearrangement, and one test case to be executed, with the next execution target test case of the one test case, the operating conditions contained therein before each processing item in each of the pre-processing procedure prior A processing content comparison unit (111) that performs a first comparison until there is a preprocessing item that does not match the operation condition or all match, according to the order of the article preprocessing procedure, and the first When there is a matching pre-processing item by comparison, execution of the post-processing item of the one test case corresponding to the matching pre-processing item and execution of the matching pre-processing item of the next test case A procedure determining unit (112) for instructing the test execution unit to perform a test of the one test case and the next test case is omitted.
The invention according to claim 2 includes a test execution unit (10) that controls a plurality of test apparatuses and executes various tests of the mobile communication terminal (2) to be tested, and a stage before the test. A plurality of pre-processing items in which processing for setting the plurality of test apparatuses from the respective known operating conditions to operating conditions according to the contents of the various tests are divided into items by execution units are arranged in the order of execution. A pre-processing procedure, an execution processing procedure for executing the test itself, and a processing executed after the execution processing procedure and processed in the reverse order of the pre-processing procedure, to determine the operating conditions of the plurality of test apparatuses A test case storage unit (12) for storing a plurality of test cases of three or more, with a post-processing procedure in which a plurality of post-processing items for returning to a known operating condition are arranged as a set of test cases, The test execution unit The mobile communication terminal test system that executes the test along the test line, the pre-processing item in the plurality of test cases in advance, the one corresponding to the one pre-processing item of each test case Based on the operating condition, the maximum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so that the processing time for all the test cases is maximized, and the plurality of times so that the processing time for all the test cases is minimized. A processing cost calculation unit (1112) that calculates a processing time difference from a difference from a minimum processing time when the test cases are rearranged, and the preprocessing item that minimizes the processing time difference is the minimum processing time. On the basis of the execution order of a plurality of test cases, the plurality of test tests in the order of the pre-processing item having a small processing time difference from the pre-processing item having a small processing time For the pre-processing items for rearranging cases and rearranging test cases later, the execution order of the test cases rearranged first and the pre-processing items for rearranging test cases later An execution order determination unit (1111) that rearranges the execution order of the plurality of test cases by rearranging based on the corresponding operation conditions, and after the rearrangement, one test case to be executed And the next test target test case, the operation conditions included in each pre-processing item in each pre-processing procedure are compared in the order of the pre-processing procedure, and the operating conditions do not match. If there is a processing content comparison unit (111) that performs the first comparison until there is a preprocessing item or until all match, and there is a preprocessing item that matches by the first comparison, The execution of the post-processing item of the one test case corresponding to the matching pre-processing item and the execution of the matching pre-processing item of the next test case are omitted, and the one test case and the next test item are omitted. And a procedure determination unit (112) for instructing the test execution unit to perform the test of the test case .
The invention according to claim 3 is the mobile communication terminal test system according to claim 1 or 2 , wherein the procedure determination unit is configured to perform the process between the one test case and the next test case. When the first comparison result indicates that all the preprocessing items have the same operating conditions, the execution of all the preprocessing items in the preprocessing procedure of the next test case is omitted, and the previous test case is The execution of all post-processing items in the article post-processing procedure is omitted.
The invention according to claim 4 is the mobile communication terminal test system according to any one of claims 1 to 3 , and is executed for each of the preprocessing items constituting the preprocessing procedure. A factor is added so that the priority is higher as the order in which the data is processed is faster, and the post-processing item for returning the operation condition set along one pre-processing item to the known operation condition is applied to the one processing item. The same coefficient as that of the pre-processing item is assigned, and the execution processing procedure is given a coefficient so as to have a lower priority than the coefficient of any pre-processing item. When the processing unit detects a preprocessing item having a different operating condition in the first comparison, a preprocessing immediately before detecting a preprocessing item having a different operating condition among the preprocessing items of the next test case. The same coefficient as the item coefficient And omitting the execution of the pre-processing item to which the coefficient of the order direction opposite to the order direction is attached, and among the post-processing items of the one test case, of the next test case, Execution of the post-processing item to which the same coefficient as the omitted pre-processing item is attached is omitted.
Further, in the invention according to claim 5 , processing for setting a plurality of test apparatuses from respective known operating conditions to operating conditions according to the contents of the various tests is performed in an execution unit before the test. A pre-processing procedure in which a plurality of pre-processing items divided in order of execution, an execution processing procedure for executing the test itself, and an order reverse to the pre-processing procedure executed after the execution processing procedure And a post-processing procedure in which a plurality of post-processing items for returning the operating conditions of the plurality of test devices to the known operating conditions are arranged as a set of test cases, along the test cases. a test method using a mobile communication terminal testing system for performing a test, the plurality of the test cases, one of the pre-processing items, the operating condition corresponding to the one of the pre-processing items for each test case Based on the above, the maximum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so as to maximize the processing time for all the test cases, and the plurality of test cases so that the processing time for all the test cases is minimized. A processing time difference calculating step for calculating a processing time difference from a difference from a minimum processing time when rearranging, and at least a preprocessing item having the largest processing time difference, so that the minimum processing time is the minimum processing time. determined as the order of execution of the order, the plurality of rearrangement step to rearrange the order of execution of the test case, before the start of the study for one test case to be executed, and the one test case, of the one For each pre-processing item in each pre-processing procedure between the test case to be executed next to the test case A procedure comparison step that compares the included operating conditions in the order of the pre-processing procedure, and performs a first comparison until there is a pre-processing item that does not match the operating conditions, or until all the operating conditions match; When all the operation conditions of the first test result and each pre-processing item match between one test case and the next test case, all the pre-processing items in the pre-processing procedure of the next test case A step of omitting execution and omitting execution of all post-processing items in the post-processing procedure of the one test case.
The invention according to claim 6 is the test method according to claim 5 , wherein, in the rearranging step, the plurality of the plurality of processing times that are the minimum processing time with respect to the preprocessing item that minimizes the processing time difference. Based on the execution order of the test cases, the plurality of test cases are rearranged in order from the preprocessing item having the smallest processing time difference to the preprocessing item having the largest processing time difference, and the test case is rearranged later. The processing items are sorted based on the execution order of the test cases rearranged first and the operation conditions corresponding to the pre-processing items to be rearranged later, so that the plurality of test cases are sorted. The execution order is rearranged.
The invention according to claim 7 is the test method according to claim 5 or 6 , wherein the pre-processing items constituting the pre-processing procedure are executed before the rearranging step. A factor is added so that the priority is higher as the order of execution is faster, and the post-processing item for returning the operation condition set along one pre-processing item to the known operation condition is the one for the post-processing item. The same coefficient as that of the two preprocessing items is attached, and the execution processing procedure further includes a coefficient setting step for assigning a coefficient so that the priority order is lower than the coefficient of any preprocessing item, and the procedure is omitted. In the step, when a pre-processing item having a different operating condition is detected by the first comparison, a pre-processing item immediately before detecting a pre-processing item having a different operating condition among the pre-processing items of the next test case is detected. Processing term The execution of the pre-processing item to which the coefficient having the magnitude in the order direction opposite to the order direction is omitted from the same coefficient as the coefficient of Among the test cases, the execution of the post-processing item having the same coefficient as the omitted pre-processing item is omitted.

  The mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention specifies common pre-processing items and post-processing items between test cases that are continuously executed. As a result, the mobile communication terminal test system is required to execute the next test case while omitting the execution of process items that overlap between consecutive test cases and maintaining the dependency between the process items. Only process items can be executed.

  In addition, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention rearranges the execution order between test cases so that test cases having the same preprocessing items are continuously executed. Processing items and post-processing items can be duplicated, and execution of processing items can be omitted.

  From the above, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention eliminates the need to return each test apparatus to a predetermined state for each test case because the execution of the processing items that overlap between the test cases is omitted. Time can be shortened.

It is a block diagram of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment and Modification 1. It is a figure for demonstrating the data structure of the test case data in the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on this invention. It is a figure for demonstrating the process regarding the change of the execution order between the test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating the state between each test case before and behind the change of the execution order between test cases. It is a figure for demonstrating the process which abbreviate | omits execution of the process item common between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating the process which abbreviate | omits execution of the process item common between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on the modification 1. FIG. It is a block diagram of a mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 2 and Modification 3. It is an example of the process cost in each pre-process item which the process cost calculation part which concerns on the modification 2 and the modification 3 uses for calculation of a process cost difference. It is a figure for demonstrating the process regarding the change of the execution order between the test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on the modification 2. FIG. It is a figure for demonstrating the process regarding the change of the execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system which concerns on the modification 3. FIG. 15 is a flowchart for explaining processing of an execution order determination unit and a processing cost calculation unit according to Modification 3. It is a system block diagram which shows the example of the system configuration regarding the conventional mobile communication terminal test system. It is a figure for demonstrating the data structure of the test case data in a mobile communication terminal test system.

(First embodiment)
The configuration of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment will be described with reference to FIG. The test case execution control unit 11 of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention further includes a processing content comparison unit 111 and a procedure determination unit 112. Note that the functional blocks to which the same reference numerals as those in FIG. 12 are assigned indicate the same configurations as the functional blocks to which the reference numerals are assigned in FIG. For this reason, in this description, the processing content comparison unit 111 and the procedure determination unit 112, which are different configurations from the conventional mobile communication terminal test system, will be described, and detailed description of other configurations will be omitted.

(Data structure of test case data)
First, the data structure of the test case data in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 2 is a diagram for explaining the data structure of the test case data. In addition to the conventional test case data shown in FIG. 13, an execution flag and a procedure depth are added as constituent elements to the test case data according to the present invention. The execution flag and procedure depth will be described later. Other constituent elements are the same as the constituent elements of the test case data shown in FIG. 13, and detailed description thereof is omitted.

  The test case data in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the present invention includes a processing parameter for causing each test apparatus to execute a pre-processing item, an execution processing procedure or a post-processing item constituting the test case, and execution of each processing item. An execution flag for validating is included. The test case execution control unit 11 reads the test case data from the test case storage unit 12, and executes each processing item for each test apparatus based on the processing parameters set in the test case data via the test execution unit 10. Let

  As processing items to be executed by each test apparatus, for example, pre-processing items include functions such as “temperature setting”, “system setting”, “frequency setting”, “output level setting”, or “connection with terminal”. Is included. The post-processing items include, for example, “reset temperature setting”, “reset system setting”, “reset output level”, “reset frequency setting”, or “ Functions such as “disconnection with terminal” are included (see FIG. 2).

  In this description, the above-described functions are executed as the pre-processing item and post-processing item of each test case. The processing parameters corresponding to the contents of each processing item will be described below. Note that the above-described function is an example of processing items constituting the test case, and is not limited to the above function.

  The pre-processing item “temperature setting” is a processing item in which the temperature management device 3 changes the temperature of the test environment in accordance with the test conditions. The corresponding post-processing item “reset temperature setting” indicates that the temperature management device 3 changes the temperature of the test environment changed in the pre-processing item “temperature setting” to the original state (default state) before the change. ) Is a processing item to be returned to. As processing parameters corresponding to “temperature setting” and “temperature setting reset”, for example, a value indicating a set temperature such as 35 ° C. or 24 ° C. is set.

  The pre-processing item “system setting” is a processing item in which each test apparatus replaces software with a predetermined version in accordance with test conditions. The corresponding post-processing item “system setting reset” is a processing item in which each test apparatus returns the software replaced in the pre-processing item “system setting” to a predetermined version of software as a reference. As processing parameters corresponding to “system setting” and “system setting reset”, information capable of identifying each software to be replaced is set. Specific examples of processing parameters include values indicating software versions such as 1.31 and 2.02.

  The pre-processing item “frequency setting” is a processing item in which a test apparatus such as a signal generator sets a frequency band in accordance with test conditions. A corresponding post-processing item “reset frequency setting” is a processing item in which a test apparatus such as a signal generator returns the frequency band changed by the pre-processing item “frequency setting” to a predetermined state. As processing parameters corresponding to “frequency setting” and “frequency setting reset”, for example, a value indicating a frequency such as 500 MHz or 1 GHz is set.

  The pre-processing item “output level setting” is a processing item in which each test apparatus changes the signal output level in accordance with the test conditions. The corresponding post-processing item “output level reset” is a processing item in which each test apparatus returns the output level of the signal changed in the pre-processing item “output level setting” to a predetermined state. As processing parameters corresponding to “output level setting” and “output level reset”, for example, a value indicating the output level of a signal such as 0 dBm or −10 dBm is set.

  The pre-processing item “connection with terminal” is a processing item in which the pseudo base station (mobile communication terminal test system) sets connection conditions according to the test conditions and establishes communication with the mobile communication terminal 2. In addition, the corresponding post-processing item “cancel connection with terminal” indicates that the pseudo base station disconnects communication established with the mobile communication terminal and sets the changed connection condition to a default state. This is a process item to be returned. As processing parameters corresponding to “connection with terminal” and “disconnection with terminal”, values for determining a plurality of connection conditions are set. In this description, it is assumed that a plurality of connection conditions are prepared as presets, an identification number is assigned to each connection condition, and the identification numbers are stored as processing parameters. Specifically, the identification number “1” indicates “connection condition 1”, and the identification number “2” indicates “connection condition 2”.

  In the “execution of test” which is a test execution procedure, a test corresponding to each test case is executed. A value for discriminating a plurality of tests to be executed is set in the processing parameter. In this description, as a plurality of tests, it is assumed that the identifier “1” indicates an anti-jamming wave test and the identifier “2” indicates a transmission test.

  An operation in which each processing item is executed in each test apparatus will be described by taking “temperature setting” and “temperature setting reset” as examples. In the case of “temperature setting” as the pre-processing item, the temperature (for example, “35 ° C.”) at which the temperature management device 3 that changes the temperature of the test environment is the processing parameter set in the pre-processing item “temperature setting”. Is changed from a predetermined state (for example, “24 ° C.”) to the operating condition (35 ° C.) designated by the preprocessing item.

  At this time, in the case of “reset temperature setting” which is a post-processing item corresponding to the pre-processing item “temperature setting”, the temperature management device 3 is the processing parameter set to the post-processing item “reset temperature setting”. However, the predetermined state (“24 ° C.”) is read, and the temperature of the test environment is returned from the operating condition (35 ° C.) changed by the pre-processing item “temperature setting” to the predetermined state (24 ° C.).

  The execution flag is used to determine whether or not to execute the corresponding process item. For example, in FIG. 2, a processing item for which 1 is set as the execution flag is determined as an execution target, and a processing item for which the execution flag is set to 0 is determined as a target to be omitted.

  In addition, each processing item constituting the test case is given a coefficient according to its execution order. Hereinafter, this coefficient is referred to as procedure depth. This procedure depth is attached to each processing item in advance before shipment. In addition, the operator may be able to set the procedure depth of each processing item via the operation unit 13.

  The pre-processing items are given a procedure depth that is smaller for processing items that are executed earlier. At this time, the order of the processing items may be determined so that the procedure depth becomes smaller as the preprocessing item takes longer processing time. Specifically, when changing from a default state to a target operation condition, it is preferable to determine the order of the processing items so that the pre-processing items that require more time have a faster execution order. In addition, between processing items having a dependency relationship, an execution processing order is determined based on the dependency relationship, and a procedure depth is attached.

  The same procedure depth as the corresponding pre-processing item is attached to the post-processing item. For example, the same procedure depth 100 as that of the corresponding preprocessing item is assigned to the postprocessing item that returns the operating condition changed by the procedure depth of 100 preprocessing items to the default state. As a result, as shown in FIG. 2, a larger procedure depth is assigned to a post-processing item that is earlier in execution order.

  Further, a procedure depth larger (largest) than any processing item is attached to the execution processing procedure. Note that, as described above, the process of adding procedure depth to each pre-processing item and each post-processing item in advance corresponds to the coefficient setting step.

  As described above, when a test environment immediately after or immediately before a processing item with a predetermined procedure depth is executed, it is possible to determine which processing item should be executed based on the predetermined procedure depth. It becomes. Specifically, when it is desired to construct a test environment immediately after execution of a preprocessing item to which procedure depth 100 is attached, it is possible to determine that preprocessing items less than procedure depth 100 need only be executed. In addition, when constructing a test environment immediately before executing an execution procedure, it is determined that pre-processing items less than the procedure depth attached to the execution procedure, that is, all pre-processing items may be executed. Is possible.

  It should be noted that each function necessary for carrying out the test may be further divided into sub-functions as processing items. In this case, for example, when the function corresponding to the preprocessing item of the procedure depth 100 is a preprocessing item for each sub-function, the procedure depth of the sub-function preprocessing item is set according to the processing order, for example, 200, It may be set as 300, 400,.

  In this description, procedure depths are assigned in ascending order according to the execution order of the preprocessing items, but are not necessarily limited to ascending order. As long as the information can identify the execution order of each processing item, for example, a descending order such as 10000, 1000, 100,... May be used, or a numerical value other than A, B, C,. May be used. In this description, it is assumed that procedure depths are assigned in ascending order.

  The processing content comparison unit 111 includes an execution order determination unit 1111. First, the processing content comparison unit 111 extracts test case data from the test case storage unit 12 according to the test conditions specified by the operator from the operation unit 13. The processing content comparison unit 111 transmits the extracted plurality of test case data to the execution order determination unit 1111 to rearrange the order of the test case data (hereinafter, this order is referred to as “execution order between test cases”). .

  The execution order determination unit 1111 receives a plurality of test case data from the processing content comparison unit 111 and compares the processing parameters of each test case data for each procedure depth. Thereafter, the execution order determining unit 1111 changes the execution order between the test cases so that the test cases having the common pre-processing items are continuously executed based on the comparison result. A method for changing the execution order between test cases will be described below.

(Change of execution order between test cases)
The execution order determination unit 1111 compares the processing parameters corresponding to the pre-processing items of the same procedure depth in each test case in the descending order of the procedure depth, and the test case having the pre-processing item in which the same processing parameter is set. Rearrange the execution order between test cases so that they are executed continuously.

  Hereinafter, a method for changing the execution order between test cases will be specifically described with reference to FIGS. 3A to 3C and FIG. FIG. 3 is a diagram for explaining processing related to a change in execution order between test cases. FIG. 3A shows the state of the list of test case data before changing the execution order. FIG. 3B and FIG. 3C show the state of the process when rearranging the execution order between the test cases. FIG. 4 shows the state of the test case data list after the execution order determining unit 1111 rearranges the execution order between the test cases in response to the test case data list shown in FIG. ing.

  <1> First, the execution order determination unit 1111 compares the processing parameters of the pre-processing item with the procedure depth 1 between the test cases, and rearranges the execution order between the test cases in the order of the processing parameters. FIG. 3B shows the result of rearranging the execution order between the test cases based on the processing parameters of procedure depth 1. In this case, the execution order determination unit 1111 classifies the test case to set the temperature setting to 26 ° C. and the test case to set to 35 ° C. In this description, the execution order between test cases is rearranged in ascending order of processing parameters (ascending order), but it is not limited to ascending order, and the same is true even if the processing parameters are rearranged in descending order (descending order). An effect can be obtained.

  <2> Next, the execution order determination unit 1111 compares the processing parameters corresponding to the preprocessing items with the procedure depth 10 between the test cases, and arranges the execution order between the test cases in the order of the processing parameters. Change. At this time, the execution order determination unit 1111 corresponds to the test cases in the range classified by the previous comparison, that is, all the preprocessing items previously used as the reference for comparison (in this case, the preprocessing items of procedure depth 1 correspond) ), The execution order between the test cases is rearranged only between the test cases in which the same processing parameter is set. That is, the execution order determination unit 1111 does not rearrange the execution order between test cases having different processing parameters in the preprocessing item (procedure depth 1) that has been used as a reference for the rearrangement before.

  FIG. 3C shows the result of rearranging the execution order between the test cases based on the processing parameters of the procedure depth 10. In this case, the execution order determination unit 1111 classifies, for example, between a test case where the temperature setting is set to 26 ° C., a test case where the system setting is set to 1.31, and a test case which is set to 2.02. Similarly, among the test cases where the temperature setting is set to 35 ° C., the test case is classified into a test case where the system setting is set to 1.31 and a test case which is set to 2.02.

  After <3>, the execution order determination unit 1111 compares the processing parameters of the preprocessing items with procedure depths 100, 1000, and 10000 between the test cases in the same manner as in <2>, and sequentially tests them. Rearrange the execution order between cases.

  As described above, the priorities of the preprocessing items to be compared when rearranging the test cases are lowered in the order of procedure depth 1, 10, 100,. This is because each test case places pre-processing items that take more time in an earlier order in the pre-processing procedure.

  In this way, the processing parameters are compared between the test cases for all the procedure depth pre-processing items in the pre-processing procedure, and the execution order between the test cases is rearranged. FIG. 4 shows a state (arrangement order) between the test cases after the execution order determining unit 1111 changes the execution order between the test cases.

  In FIG. 4, for example, the processing parameter corresponding to “temperature setting” of procedure depth 1 is changed only between test cases Case 4 and Case 3 (the operating condition is changed once). On the other hand, the processing parameter corresponding to the “system setting” of the procedure depth 10 is changed between the test cases Case 8 and Case 5, between the test cases Case 4 and Case 3, and between the test cases Case 3 and Case 1 (operating conditions). Is changed three times).

  In this way, by comparing the processing parameters of each preprocessing item and rearranging the execution order between the test cases by the above-described method, the processing condition is changed depending on the processing parameter for the processing item having a lower procedure depth. Less often. This is because when the order of execution between test cases is rearranged based on the processing parameters of a preprocessing item with a certain procedure depth, the same processing parameter between test cases is displayed in the preprocessing item that was previously used as a reference for comparison. This is because the execution order between the test cases is rearranged only in the range of the set test cases. The process related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases by the execution order determination unit 1111 described above corresponds to the rearrangement step.

  Next, the processing content comparison unit 111 sets two consecutive test cases as a set (hereinafter, this set may be referred to as a “test case set”), and sets the processing parameters of the respective pre-processing items in the order of decreasing procedure depth. Compare sequentially. When a preprocessing item having a different processing parameter is found, the procedure determining unit 112 is notified of the procedure depth of the preprocessing item having a different processing parameter, and the execution of the subsequent comparison processing is stopped (the procedure determining unit 112 will be described later). To do). In other words, the processing content comparison unit 111 notifies the procedure determination unit 112 of the procedure depth of the pre-processing item with the different processing parameter found first. Further, when the preprocessing item having a different processing parameter cannot be found, the processing content comparison unit 111 notifies the procedure determination unit 112 of the procedure depth of the execution processing procedure.

  The processing content comparison unit 111 performs the comparison process for all the two consecutive test case groups in the test case to be executed, and notifies the procedure determination unit 112 for each test case group. Note that the comparison processing by the processing content comparison unit 111 described above corresponds to a procedure comparison step.

  When the procedure determination unit 112 receives a procedure depth of the execution processing procedure from the processing content comparison unit 111 (when the set of test cases to be compared has the same pre-processing procedure), the procedure determination unit 112 Execution of all post-processing items in the post-processing procedure of the test case to be executed and all pre-processing items in the pre-processing procedure of the test case to be executed later is omitted. When the procedure determination unit 112 receives a procedure depth of a preprocessing item having a different processing parameter from the processing content comparison unit 111, the procedure determination unit 112 does not omit the execution of the processing item.

(Determination of processing items to be skipped)
The omission of the processing procedure in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment will be specifically described with reference to FIG. FIG. 5 is a diagram for explaining processing in which execution of processing items common between test cases is omitted in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment.

  When test cases that execute tests with the same configuration (using the same test equipment under the same operating conditions) are continuously executed, the conventional mobile communication terminal test system uses each preprocessing item for each test case. The test environment was constructed by the above, and after the test execution, each test apparatus was returned to a predetermined state by each post-processing item. However, immediately after the test of the test case to be executed first, the operating conditions necessary for the test of the test case to be executed next have already been set for each test device, and the test to be executed next. Case testing can be performed immediately. In this case, each post-processing item of the test case to be executed first and each pre-processing item of the test case to be executed next are redundant processing, and the procedure determination unit 112 omits execution of this redundant processing. .

  In the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment, when a procedure depth of an execution processing procedure is received from the processing content comparison unit 111 (when a set of test cases to be compared has the same pre-processing procedure) Only the execution of the process item is omitted by the procedure determination unit 112.

  For example, the test parameters CaseA1 and CaseA2 in FIG. 5 have the same processing parameters for the respective preprocessing items (preprocessing items from procedure depth 1 to 10,000) in the preprocessing procedure. At this time, the processing content comparison unit 111 transmits a procedure depth 100000 of the execution processing procedure to the procedure determination unit 112.

  The procedure determination unit 112 confirms that the procedure depth received from the processing content comparison unit 111 is the procedure depth 100000 of the execution processing procedure, and executes the execution flag for all the post-processing items of the test case CaseA1 to be executed first. Set flag 0 to omit execution. In addition, the procedure determination unit 112 sets a flag 0 for omitting execution as an execution flag for all pre-processing items of the test case CaseA2 to be executed later. At this time, the process item for which the procedure determining unit 112 sets the flag 0 as the execution flag is indicated by a range M1 in FIG.

  When a procedure depth of a pre-processing item having a different processing parameter is notified from the processing content comparison unit 111, the procedure determination unit 112 does not omit execution of the processing item.

  For example, the test cases CaseA5 and CaseA6 in FIG. 5 have different processing parameters corresponding to the preprocessing items indicated by the range M2 in FIG. 5, that is, the preprocessing items of the procedure depths 1000 and 10,000 (from the processing content comparison unit 111 at this time). The procedure determination unit 112 is notified of the procedure depth 1000). At this time, the procedure determination unit 112 does not change the execution flag indicating omission of execution of the processing item because the procedure depth received from the processing content comparison unit 111 is not the procedure depth 100000 of the execution processing procedure. Note that the process related to the omission of execution of the process item by the procedure determination unit 112 described above corresponds to a procedure omission step.

  Thereafter, the test case execution control unit 11 sequentially reads each test case data according to the execution order between the test cases, and causes the corresponding test apparatus to execute the pre-processing item, the execution processing procedure, and the post-processing item of each test case. The test execution unit 10 is instructed. At this time, the test case execution control unit 11 instructs the test execution unit 10 to cause the test apparatus corresponding to the processing item to execute the processing item in which the flag 1 for executing the processing item is set in the execution flag. To do. In addition, the test case execution control unit 11 instructs the test execution unit 10 not to execute a processing item for which the execution flag is set to 0 for omitting execution, in the test apparatus corresponding to the processing item.

  As a result, when two consecutive test cases have a common pre-processing item, the execution of the post-processing item of the test case executed first is omitted after the test of the test case executed first. At this time, the test apparatus corresponding to the post-processing item for which execution has been omitted holds the operating condition after the pre-processing item for the test case to be executed first is executed. Then, the test of the test case to be executed next is executed, and the operation condition of the test apparatus is returned to the default state by the post-processing item of the test case to be executed next.

  In this way, between the tests of two consecutive test cases having a common pre-processing item, processing to return the operating condition of each test apparatus to a predetermined state (post-processing item of the test case executed first), Execution of the processing for re-setting (the pre-processing item of the test case to be executed next) is omitted.

  In summary, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment first rearranges the execution order between the test cases so that the test cases having the same preprocessing items are continuously executed. Next, the mobile communication terminal test system compares the processing parameters of each preprocessing item between test cases that are continuously executed, and specifies a common preprocessing procedure and a postprocessing procedure. Finally, when the pre-processing procedure and the post-processing procedure are common between test cases, the mobile communication terminal test system determines all post-processing items of the test case to be executed first and the test case to be executed next. Omit execution of all pre-processing items. Thereby, the mobile communication terminal test system can omit the execution of the pre-processing item and the post-processing item overlapping between successive test cases while maintaining the dependency relationship between the processing items.

  From the above, since the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment omits the execution of the processing items that overlap between the test cases, it is necessary to return each test apparatus to a predetermined state for each test case. As a result, the test time can be shortened.

  Note that when execution of processing items by the procedure determination unit 112 is omitted based on the comparison result of the processing content comparison unit 111, the execution order between the test cases is not necessarily rearranged by the execution order determination unit 1111 in advance. There is no need to be. The processing content comparison unit 111 may be configured to perform the above-described processing parameter comparison processing on a plurality of test case data extracted from the test case storage unit 12. The processing content comparison unit 111 compares the processing parameters with respect to a plurality of test case data whose execution order is rearranged by the execution order determination unit 1111, and the procedure determination unit 112 receives the processing result and executes the execution of the processing item. By omitting, it is possible to omit execution of more pre-processing items and post-processing items.

(Modification 1)
In the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment, execution of a processing item is omitted only when the processing parameters of all the preprocessing items are the same in a set of test cases. In the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first modification, process items whose execution is omitted are determined in smaller process item units. In this description, the description will be given focusing on the procedure determining unit 112a that operates differently from the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment.

(Determination of processing items to be skipped)
The omission of the processing procedure in the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 1 will be specifically described with reference to FIG. FIG. 6 is a diagram for explaining processing in which execution of processing items common between test cases is omitted in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first modification.

  The procedure determination unit 112a of the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modification 1 executes, for each processing item, a set of test cases corresponding to the procedure depth based on the procedure depth received from the processing content comparison unit 111. Processing to omit is determined.

  At this time, the procedure determination unit 112a has received the test case post-processing item executed first and the test case pre-processing item executed later in the test case set corresponding to the received procedure depth. Execution of processing items for which a procedure depth less than the procedure depth is set is omitted.

  For example, the test cases CaseB5 and CaseB6 in FIG. 6 have different processing parameters corresponding to the preprocessing items of the procedure depths 1000 and 10,000. At this time, the procedure determination unit 112a receives the procedure depth 1000 from the processing content comparison unit 111.

  The procedure determination unit 112a receives the procedure depth 1000, and sets a flag 0 for omitting execution to the execution flag for the post-processing items less than the procedure depth 1000 among the post-processing items of the test case CaseB5 executed first. Set. In addition, the procedure determination unit 112a also sets a flag 0 that omits execution to the execution flag for the preprocessing items less than the procedure depth 1000 among the preprocessing items of the test case CaseB6 to be executed later. At this time, the process item for which the procedure determining unit 112a sets the flag 0 as the execution flag is indicated by a range M4 in FIG.

  Further, when all the processing parameters of each preprocessing item of the preprocessing procedure are equal as in the test cases CaseB1 and CaseB2 of FIG. 6, the procedure determining unit 112a receives the procedure depth 100000 of the execution processing procedure from the processing content comparison unit 111. To do.

  At this time, the procedure determination unit 112a receives the procedure depth 100000 of the received execution processing procedure, and executes the post-processing items less than the procedure depth 100000 among the post-processing items of the test case CaseB1 to be executed first. A flag 0 that omits execution is set in the flag. In addition, the procedure determination unit 112a also sets a flag 0 for omitting execution to the execution flag for the preprocessing items less than the procedure depth 100000 among the preprocessing items of the test case CaseB2 to be executed later. At this time, the process item for which the procedure determination unit 112a sets the flag 0 as the execution flag is indicated by a range M3 in FIG. As a result, similar to the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment, the execution of all post-processing items of the test case CaseB1 and all pre-processing items of the test case CaseB1 is omitted.

  As described above, the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 1 can omit the execution of the process items common to the test cases in units of process items that are finer than those in the first embodiment. Thereby, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first modification can further shorten the test time than the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment.

(Modification 2)
The execution order determination unit 1111 according to the first embodiment compares the processing parameters corresponding to the pre-processing items of the same procedure depth in each test case in ascending order of procedure depth, and between test cases based on the comparison result Was rearranged. However, among the pre-processing items, there is a pre-processing item whose test time is not shortened so much by rearranging the execution order. In addition, when the same processing parameter is set for a specific preprocessing item among all the test cases to be executed, the test time is not shortened by rearranging the execution order for this preprocessing item. . For such pre-processing items, when the corresponding processing parameters are compared and the execution order between the test cases is rearranged, the effect of reducing the test time is less than the processing related to the rearrangement. This effect becomes more prominent as the number of test cases to be executed increases.

  On the other hand, when the test cases are rearranged for one preprocessing item, the processing time may be maximized or the processing time may be minimized. In the mobile communication terminal test system according to the second modification, a coefficient indicating a possible range of time for processing one preprocessing item for all test cases by rearranging the test cases (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 Modification 2 calculates a processing cost difference for each preprocessing item (a specific method for calculating the processing cost difference will be described later). That is, the larger the processing cost difference, the wider the total test time that can be taken by rearranging the execution order between test cases. In other words, when the execution order between the test cases is rearranged so that the test process with the same operating condition is continuously executed for the pre-process item for the pre-process item having the larger processing cost difference, It shows that the effect on time reduction is the greatest.

  The mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 2 rearranges the preprocessing items having the largest calculated processing cost difference so that test cases having the same operating conditions are continuously executed. Thereby, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 2 is characterized in that the entire test time is shortened while the processing time related to the rearrangement of the test cases is shortened. Hereinafter, a mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 2 will be described.

  First, the configuration of the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 2 will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 7 is a block diagram of a mobile communication terminal test system according to the second modification. As shown in FIG. 7, the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 2 is different from the mobile communication terminal test system according to the first embodiment in the configuration of the processing content comparison unit 111a. In this description, a description will be given focusing on the configuration and processing of the processing content comparison unit 111a different from the first embodiment. In addition, the functional block to which the code | symbol similar to FIG. 1 was attached | subjected shows the structure similar to the functional block to which this code | symbol was attached | subjected in FIG. 1, and detailed description is abbreviate | omitted.

  The processing content comparison unit 111a according to Modification 2 includes an execution order determination unit 1111a and a processing cost calculation unit 1112. First, the processing content comparison unit 111a extracts test case data from the test case storage unit 12 according to the test conditions specified by the operator from the operation unit 13. When the processing content comparison unit 111a extracts the test case data, the processing content comparison unit 111a first causes the processing cost calculation unit 1112 to calculate the processing cost difference.

  In response to an instruction from the processing content comparison unit 111a, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 calculates the processing cost difference of each preprocessing item 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 1112 will be described with reference to FIGS. 8 and 9. FIG. 8 is an example of the time (hereinafter referred to as “processing cost”) for changing the operating condition in each pre-processing item for the processing cost calculation unit 1112 to calculate the processing cost difference. FIG. 9 is a diagram for explaining processing relating to a change in execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the second modification. FIG. 9A shows a state before the execution order between test cases is changed.

  The processing cost for each preprocessing item shown in FIG. 8 may be stored in advance in a storage area provided in the processing cost calculation unit 1112. In this case, the processing cost is stored in advance in the storage area of the processing cost calculation unit 1112 for each processing parameter that can be taken in each preprocessing item. As another method, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 may be provided with a function for calculating the processing cost for each preprocessing item. For example, in the case of “temperature setting”, the function for calculating the processing cost corresponds to processing logic such as “it takes 30 minutes to raise the temperature by 9 ° C.”.

  When the processing cost calculation unit 1112 first sorts the test cases for one pre-processing item, when processing the one pre-processing item for all the extracted test cases, each consecutive test case For each pre-processing item, the time when the sum of the time for changing the operating conditions between them is maximum (hereinafter referred to as “maximum processing time”) and the minimum time (hereinafter referred to as “minimum processing time”). calculate. The calculation method of the maximum processing time and the minimum processing time by the processing cost calculation unit 1112 will be specifically described below, taking as an example a case where “temperature setting” is targeted as one preprocessing item.

  First, a method for calculating the maximum processing time by the processing cost calculation unit 1112 will be described.

  <A1> First, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 specifies the test case having the highest processing cost when changing to the operating condition of the next test case with the initial state of one test case as a reference. At this time, the “initial state” indicates a state (operating condition of each test apparatus) immediately before the test is performed by the operator specifying the test condition. In FIG. 9A, the initial state of “temperature setting” is 8 ° C. At this time, it is specified that the processing cost becomes the largest when the temperature is changed to 35 ° C. from the processing cost (that is, processing time) of “temperature setting” shown in FIG. As a result, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 extracts Case 3 whose “temperature setting” is 35 ° C. from the test cases Case 1 to Case 6 and arranges them at the top of the execution order between the test cases.

  <A2> Next, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 performs the most processing when changing to the next operating condition based on the state of Case 3 arranged immediately before in the execution order between test cases, that is, “temperature setting” 35 ° C. Test cases that increase the cost are extracted from test cases that are not yet arranged in the execution order between the test cases (in this case, Case1, Case2, and Case4 to Case6). When Case 3 is used as a reference, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 extracts Case 2 that sets “temperature setting” to 8 ° C. The processing cost calculation unit 1112 arranges the extracted Case2 next to the test case (Case3) as a reference.

  After <A3>, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 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 pre-processing item becomes the highest among consecutive test cases. When Case 1 to Case 6 shown in FIG. 9A are rearranged by this method, Case 3, Case 2, Case 1, Case 5, Case 4, and Case 6 are arranged in this order. The processing cost calculation unit 1112 calculates the sum of processing costs as the maximum processing time when processing the target preprocessing item (that is, temperature setting) in the execution order between the test cases. In the case of “temperature setting” in FIG. 9A, the maximum processing time is 275 minutes.

  Next, a method for calculating the minimum processing time by the processing cost calculation unit 1112 will be described. The concept of the minimum processing time calculation method by the processing cost calculation unit 1112 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 preprocessing item. At this time, the execution order between the test cases is rearranged so that the preprocessing items of the same operation condition are continuously executed with respect to the target preprocessing items based on the initial state.

  <B1> First, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 specifies the test case with the lowest processing cost when changing to the next operating condition with the initial state as a reference. In FIG. 9A, the initial state of “temperature setting” is 8 ° C. At this time, when the “temperature setting” is not changed, that is, when the temperature is set to 8 ° C., the processing cost is minimized. Therefore, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 extracts Case 2 that sets the “temperature setting” to 8 ° C. from the test cases Case 1 to Case 6 based on the processing cost of the “temperature setting” illustrated in FIG. Place at the top of the execution order between test cases.

  <B2> Next, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 performs the most processing when changing to the next operating condition based on the state of Case 2 arranged in the execution order between test cases immediately before, that is, “temperature setting” of 8 ° C. Test cases with lower costs 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. When Case 2 is used as a reference, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 extracts Case 5 that sets “temperature setting” to 8 ° C. The processing cost calculation unit 1112 arranges the extracted Case 5 next to the reference test case (Case 2).

  After <B3>, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 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. 9A are rearranged by this method, Case 2, Case 5, Case 6, Case 1, Case 4, and Case 3 are arranged in this order. The processing cost calculation unit 1112 executes the preprocessing items (that is, the target processing order in the execution order between the test cases based on the processing cost of “temperature setting” shown in FIG. When the temperature setting is processed, the sum of the processing costs is calculated as the minimum processing time. In the case of “temperature setting” in FIG. 9A, the minimum processing time is 90 minutes.

  Next, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 calculates the difference between the calculated maximum processing time and the minimum processing time as the processing cost difference. This processing cost difference corresponds to the processing time difference. For example, the processing cost difference in the case of “temperature setting” is (maximum processing time−minimum processing time) = (275 minutes−90 minutes) = 185 minutes.

  The processing cost calculation unit 1112 calculates the processing cost difference for other preprocessing items in the same manner. In the case of FIG. 9A, the processing cost difference for “system setting” is 70 minutes, the processing cost difference for “frequency setting” is 0.3 minutes, and the processing cost difference for “output level setting” is 14 minutes. The processing cost calculation unit 1112 notifies the execution order determination unit 1111a of the processing cost difference calculated for each preprocessing item. Note that the processing related to calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 1112 described above corresponds to a processing time difference calculation step.

  The execution order determination unit 1111a receives the processing cost difference corresponding to each preprocessing item from the processing cost calculation unit 1112 and identifies the preprocessing item having the largest processing cost difference. In the case of FIG. 9A, the processing cost difference (185 minutes) of “temperature setting” is the highest. Therefore, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 specifies “temperature setting”.

  The execution order determination unit 1111a rearranges the test cases so that the sum of the processing costs between consecutive test cases is minimized with respect to the preprocessing item having 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, the process for obtaining the execution order between the test cases for deriving the minimum processing time shown in <B1> to <B3> need not be executed again by the execution order determining unit 1111a. FIG. 9B shows a result of rearranging the test cases shown in FIG. 9A for the pre-processing item “temperature setting”. Thereby, the execution order between the test cases is rearranged so that the test cases set with the same processing parameters are continuously executed for “temperature setting”.

  Next, the processing content comparison unit 111a receives the result of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases by the execution order determination unit 1111a, and sets the processing parameters of each pre-processing item as a procedure depth by taking two consecutive test cases as a set. Sequential comparison in ascending order. Thereafter, similar to the first embodiment, the procedure determination unit 112 receives the comparison result of the processing content comparison unit 111a and executes the process related to the omission of the processing procedure.

  As described above, in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 2, the preprocessing that can shorten the time most by rearranging the execution order between the test cases so that the preprocessing items of the same parameter are continuously executed. Identify items. This eliminates the need to compare the processing parameters and rearrange the execution order between test cases for all preprocessing items. Therefore, it is possible to reduce the processing time related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases, and to reduce the entire test time.

  As described above, it is not always necessary to calculate the processing cost difference for all the preprocessing items. Pre-processing items that are known in advance that the effect of reducing the test time is small even if the execution order between test cases is changed, can be excluded from the processing related to the calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 1112. (In other words, the processing cost calculation unit 1112 calculates the processing cost difference for only some of the preprocessing items determined in advance). In this case, the execution order determination unit 1111a identifies the preprocessing item that is the target of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases with respect to the preprocessing item for which the processing cost difference is calculated. Thereby, in the process related to the calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 1112, it is possible to reduce the calculation amount and the processing time.

  Further, as the procedure determining unit 112, the procedure determining unit 112 according to the first embodiment may be applied, or the procedure determining unit 112a according to the first modification may be applied.

(Modification 3)
The execution order determination unit 1111a according to the modification 2 receives the processing cost difference between the respective preprocessing items calculated by the processing cost calculation unit 1112, and executes between test cases for the preprocessing item having the highest processing cost difference. The order was rearranged.

  In the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 3, the execution order between the test cases is arranged so that the pre-processing items having the same operation condition are continuously executed, except for the pre-processing item having the largest processing cost difference. Change. At this time, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 3 assigns priorities among the respective pre-processing items based on the processing cost difference, and sets the test cases as targets for sorting (specific processing The contents will be described later). Thereby, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 3 is characterized in that the entire test time can be further reduced as compared with the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 2. Hereinafter, a mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 3 will be described.

  The mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 3 is different from the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 2 in the processing content of the execution order determination unit 1111a. In this description, the processing content of the execution order determination unit 1111b different from that of the second modification will be described. The configuration and processing contents of the other processing blocks are the same as in the second modification, and a specific description thereof will be omitted.

  The operation of the execution order determination unit 1111b according to Modification 3 will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 10 is a diagram for explaining processing related to a change in execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the third modification. The execution order determination unit 1111b receives a processing cost difference corresponding to each preprocessing item from the processing cost calculation unit 1112. For example, FIG. 10A shows a state before the execution order between test cases is changed. FIG. 10 (a) shows the same state as FIG. 9 (a). Therefore, the processing cost difference of each pre-processing item calculated by the processing cost calculation unit 1112 based on the processing cost of each pre-processing item shown in FIG. 8 is “temperature setting” as in FIG. 185 minutes, “System setting” is 70 minutes, “Frequency setting” is 0.3 minutes, and “Output level setting” is 14 minutes.

  The execution order determination unit 1111b receives the processing cost differences corresponding to the respective preprocessing items from the processing cost calculation unit 1112, and each test item that is consecutive for each preprocessing item is targeted for each preprocessing item in ascending order of processing cost difference. The execution order between test cases is sequentially rearranged so that the sum of processing costs between cases is minimized. Hereinafter, specific processing related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases of the execution order determination unit 1111b will be specifically described with reference to FIG.

  <C1> First, the execution order determination unit 1111b compares the processing cost differences of the respective preprocessing items, and identifies the preprocessing item having the smallest processing cost difference. In the case of FIG. 10A, since the processing cost difference of “frequency setting” is the smallest, the execution order determination unit 1111b specifies “frequency setting”.

  <C2> Next, the execution order determination unit 1111b targets the identified preprocessing item (in this case, “frequency setting”) so that the sum of processing costs between successive test cases is minimized. , Sort each test case. FIG. 10B shows the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases with the pre-processing item “frequency setting” as the state before FIG. 10A is rearranged in the execution order of the test cases. The result when each test case is rearranged so that is minimized is 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, the process for obtaining the execution order between the test cases for deriving the minimum processing time shown in <B1> to <B3> need not be executed again by the execution order determining unit 1111b.

  <C3> Next, the execution order determination unit 1111b specifies the preprocessing item with the smallest processing cost difference next to the preprocessing item to be rearranged between the test cases immediately before. When the preprocessing item that is the target of the rearrangement between test cases immediately before is “frequency setting”, the preprocessing item with the next smallest processing cost difference is “output level setting”. Therefore, at this time, the execution order determination unit 1111b specifies “output level setting”.

  When the execution order determination unit 1111b specifies the next preprocessing item with the smallest processing cost difference, each test is performed so that the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases is minimized for the specified preprocessing item. Rearrange the cases. At this time, the execution order determination unit 1111b rearranges each test case with the execution order between the test cases rearranged immediately before as the state before the rearrangement for the specified preprocessing item is performed. FIG. 10C shows the processing cost between successive test cases with the pre-processing item “output level setting” as a target before FIG. The results are shown when the test cases are rearranged so that the sum of is minimized.

  After <C4>, the execution order determination unit 1111b rearranges the execution order between the test cases for the remaining preprocessing items in the order of small processing cost difference in the same manner as in <C3>. That is, the execution order determining unit 1111b rearranges the execution order between the test cases for each pre-processing item in the order of “system setting” and “temperature setting”. For example, FIG. 10D shows the processing cost between successive test cases with the pre-processing item “system setting” as the target before FIG. The results are shown when the test cases are rearranged so that the sum of is minimized. Further, FIG. 10E shows the processing cost between successive test cases for the pre-processing item “temperature setting” with the state before execution of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases shown in FIG. The results are shown when the test cases are rearranged so that the sum of is minimized.

  Here, the rearrangement result by the execution order determination unit 1111a according to the second modification shown in FIG. 9B is compared with the rearrangement result by the execution order determination unit 1111b shown in FIG. When processing parameters are compared between FIG. 9B and FIG. 10E for the “temperature setting” with the largest processing cost difference, both are in the same order. Therefore, the processing time related to “temperature setting” is the same in FIG. 9B and FIG. However, when processing parameters are compared for “system setting”, which has the largest processing cost difference after “temperature setting”, FIG. 10 (e) performs processing within the range where “temperature setting” is set to 8 ° C. Less frequent parameter changes. Therefore, it can be seen that the test time can be shortened more in the result of FIG. 10E than in the result of FIG. 9B.

  In this way, by sequentially rearranging the execution order between test cases for each pre-processing item in ascending order of processing cost difference, execution between test cases only for the pre-processing item with the largest processing cost difference The test time can be further reduced as compared with the case where the order is rearranged.

  In the above description, an example has been described in which the execution order determination unit 1111b rearranges the execution order between the test cases with all the preprocessing items for which the processing cost difference has been calculated as the sequential targets. However, it is not always necessary to rearrange the execution order between test cases for all preprocessing items. Even if the execution order between test cases is rearranged as a target, pre-processing items with a small processing cost difference have little effect on reducing test time. For this reason, pre-processing items to be subjected to test case rearrangement may be specified at the stage before rearranging the execution order between test cases. At this time, only preprocessing items whose processing cost difference is greater than or equal to a predetermined value may be extracted as the target of rearrangement. Alternatively, a predetermined number of preprocessing items may be extracted in order of increasing processing cost difference.

  For example, taking FIG. 10A as an example, when preprocessing items with a processing cost difference of 60 minutes or more are extracted as targets, the preprocessing items to be rearranged for test cases are “temperature setting” and “system”. Setting ”. Similarly, in the case of FIG. 10A as an example, when the top two pre-processing items of the processing cost difference are extracted, the pre-processing items to be rearranged for test cases are “temperature setting” and “system setting”. It becomes.

  In addition, when there is a preprocessing item for which the processing cost difference is not calculated, the execution order determining unit 1111b does not rearrange the execution order between the test cases for the preprocessing item. This preprocessing item corresponds to the preprocessing item excluded from the processing target related to the calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 1112 described above.

  Next, the processing content comparison unit 111a receives the result of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases by the execution order determination unit 1111b, and sets the processing parameters of each pre-processing item as a procedure depth as a set of two consecutive test cases. Sequential comparison in ascending order. Thereafter, similarly to the first embodiment and the second modification, the procedure determination unit 112 receives the comparison result of the processing content comparison unit 111a and executes a process related to the omission of the processing procedure.

  Next, processing related to processing cost calculation and processing related to rearrangement of the execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 3 will be described with reference to FIG. FIG. 11 is a flowchart for explaining processing of the execution order determination unit 1111b and the processing cost calculation unit 1112 according to the third modification.

(Step S01)
The processing content comparison unit 111a 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. When the processing content comparison unit 111a extracts the test case data, the processing content comparison unit 111a first causes the processing cost calculation unit 1112 to calculate the processing cost difference.

  The processing cost calculation unit 1112 receives the instruction from the processing content comparison unit 111a, and when processing one preprocessing item for all the extracted test cases, the time for changing the operating condition between successive test cases For each pre-processing item, the maximum processing time that is the maximum and the minimum processing time that is the minimum are calculated. The processing cost calculation unit 1112 calculates a processing cost difference from the difference between the calculated maximum processing time and minimum processing time for each preprocessing item. At this time, pre-processing items that are known in advance that the effect of shortening the test time is small even if the execution order between the test cases is changed, may be excluded from the processing related to the calculation of the processing cost difference. . The processing related to the calculation of the processing cost difference by the processing cost calculation unit 1112 corresponds to a processing time difference calculation step.

(Step S02)
Next, the execution order determination unit 1111a starts processing related to the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases based on the processing cost difference of each preprocessing item calculated by the processing cost calculation unit 1112. At this time, the execution order determination unit 1111a may extract preprocessing items to be rearranged in advance based on the processing cost difference.

(Step S03)
Next, the execution order determination unit 1111a compares the processing cost differences of the respective preprocessing items, and identifies the preprocessing item having the smallest processing cost difference. For example, in the case of FIG. 10A, the execution order determination unit 1111b specifies “frequency setting”.

(Step S04)
Next, the execution order determination unit 1111a rearranges the test cases so that the sum of the processing costs between the consecutive test cases is minimized with respect to the specified preprocessing item. For example, when the test cases are rearranged for “frequency setting”, the rearrangement as shown in FIG. 10B is performed with FIG. 10A as the state before the execution order of the test cases is rearranged. Will be obtained.

(Step S05)
Next, the execution order determination unit 1111a checks whether or not the test cases for the preprocess items have been rearranged for all the extracted preprocess items. When rearrangement has been performed for all the extracted preprocessing items (step S05, Y), the process related to the rearrangement of test cases is terminated.

(Step S06)
When pre-processing items that have not yet been rearranged remain (step S05, N), the execution order determination unit 1111a performs pre-processing with the smallest processing cost difference from the pre-processing items that are not to be rearranged. Identify items. For example, after rearranging the execution order between the test cases for the preprocessing item “frequency setting”, the execution order determining unit 1111a outputs the preprocessing item “output” with the smallest processing cost difference next to “frequency setting”. Level setting "will be specified.

  After specifying the preprocessing items, the execution order determining unit 1111a rearranges the execution order between the test cases again for the specified preprocessing items. At this time, the execution order determination unit 1111a sets the execution order between the test cases rearranged immediately before to the state before performing the rearrangement for the specified preprocessing item, and arranges the execution order between the test cases. Change. For example, if the execution order between test cases is rearranged for the preprocessing item “frequency setting”, the execution order determination unit 1111a first rearranges the execution order between test cases in FIG. 10B. The state before implementation. Next, the execution order determination unit 1111a rearranges the test cases so that the sum of the processing costs between successive test cases is minimized with respect to the preprocessing item “output level setting”. FIG. 10C corresponds to the result of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases for “output level setting” by the execution order determination unit 1111a.

  Here, regarding the result of the rearrangement of the execution order between the test cases, the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modification 3 and the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modification 2 are illustrated in FIG. 9B and FIG. Compare with reference to 10 (e). FIG. 9B shows a result of rearranging the execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the second modification. FIG. 10E shows the result of rearranging the execution order between test cases in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the third modification.

  For example, if attention is paid to the preprocessing item “system setting” shown in FIG. 9B, the execution order of the test cases Case2, Case5, and Case6 is changed to the execution of Case6, Case5, and Case2 as shown in FIG. When the order is changed, the timing at which the operating condition is changed for “system setting” is reduced from twice to once.

  Here, based on the processing cost of “system setting” shown in FIG. 8B, the processing cost related to the change of the operating condition in the case of processing Case2, Case5, and Case6 with the initial state as a reference is calculated. According to this calculation result, the processing cost of the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 3 is reduced by 25 minutes compared to the mobile communication terminal test system according to Modification 2. Specifically, the processing between Case 5 and Case 2 in FIG. 10E from the sum of processing costs (45 minutes) between the initial state and Case 2 and between Case 2 and Case 5 in FIG. 9B. The cost is reduced to 20 minutes.

  As described above, in the mobile communication terminal test system according to the modified example 3, the order of execution between test cases is performed so that the pre-processing items having the same operation condition are continuously executed, except for the pre-processing item having the largest processing cost difference. Sort by. As a result, the entire test time is further shortened compared with the case where the execution order between the test cases is rearranged only for the pre-processing item with the largest processing cost difference (mobile communication terminal test system according to the second modification). It becomes possible.

  As in the second modification, the procedure determination unit 112 according to the first embodiment may be applied as the procedure determination unit 112, or the procedure determination unit 112a according to the first modification may be applied.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Mobile communication terminal test system 2 Mobile communication terminal 3 Temperature management apparatus 4 Power supply apparatus 5 Vibration apparatus 10 Test execution part 11, 11a Test case execution control part 12 Test case memory | storage part 13 Operation part 111, 111a Processing content comparison part 112 , 112a Procedure determining unit 1111, 1111a, 1111b Execution order determining unit 1112 Processing cost calculating unit

Claims (7)

A test execution unit (10) for controlling a plurality of test apparatuses and executing various tests of the mobile communication terminal (2) to be tested; and in the previous stage of the test, A pre-processing procedure in which a plurality of pre-processing items obtained by dividing the processing for setting the operating conditions according to the contents of the various tests from the operating conditions into items in units of execution is arranged in the order of execution, and the test itself is executed. And a plurality of subsequent steps for returning the operating conditions of the plurality of test apparatuses to the known operating conditions by performing processing in the reverse order of the pre-processing procedure. A test case storage unit (12) for storing a plurality of test cases of three or more , with a post-processing procedure in which processing items are arranged as a set of test cases, and the test execution unit is arranged along the test cases with the test cases Run the test A mobile communication terminal test system,
In order to maximize the time for processing one preprocessing item in the plurality of test cases in advance for all the test cases based on the operation condition corresponding to the one preprocessing item of each test case. The processing time difference is calculated from the difference between 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 processing time for all the test cases is minimized. A processing cost calculation unit (1112) to calculate, and an execution order determination unit that rearranges the order of the plurality of test cases as the execution order so as to be the minimum processing time for at least the preprocessing item having the largest processing time difference. (1111) and provided with, after the reordering, and one test case to be executed, the next execution target of the one test case Compare the operation conditions included in each pre-processing item in each pre-processing procedure with the test cases in the order of the pre-processing procedure until there is a pre-processing item that does not match the operating conditions. Or a processing content comparison unit (111) that performs the first comparison until all match,
When there is a matching pre-processing item by the first comparison, the execution of the post-processing item of the one test case corresponding to the matching pre-processing item and the matching pre-processing item of the next test case And a procedure determining unit (112) for instructing the test execution unit to perform the test of the one test case and the next test case. . A test execution unit (10) for controlling a plurality of test apparatuses and executing various tests of the mobile communication terminal (2) to be tested; and in the previous stage of the test, A pre-processing procedure in which a plurality of pre-processing items obtained by dividing the processing for setting the operating conditions according to the contents of the various tests from the operating conditions into items in units of execution is arranged in the order of execution, and the test itself is executed. And a plurality of subsequent steps for returning the operating conditions of the plurality of test apparatuses to the known operating conditions by performing processing in the reverse order of the pre-processing procedure. A test case storage unit (12) for storing a plurality of test cases of three or more , with a post-processing procedure in which processing items are arranged as a set of test cases, and the test execution unit is arranged along the test cases with the test cases Run the test A mobile communication terminal test system,
In order to maximize the time for processing one preprocessing item in the plurality of test cases in advance for all the test cases based on the operation condition corresponding to the one preprocessing item of each test case. The processing time difference is calculated from the difference between 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 processing time for all the test cases is minimized. The preprocessing with a small processing time difference based on the execution order of the plurality of test cases with the minimum processing time for the processing cost calculation unit (1112) to calculate and the preprocessing items with the minimum processing time difference Sorting the plurality of test cases in the order of the pre-processing items from the item in order, and before rearranging the test cases later For the pre-processing items, the plurality of test cases are rearranged based on the execution order of the test cases rearranged first and the operation conditions corresponding to the pre-processing items for rearranging the test cases later. rearranging the execution order determiner execution order of (1111), it has a capital, after the rearranging, between one of the test cases and the next execution target test case to be executed, each of the pre-processing procedure The operation conditions included in each pre-processing item are compared in the order of the pre-processing procedure, and a first comparison is performed until there is a pre-processing item that does not match the operating conditions or all of them match. A processing content comparison unit (111);
When there is a matching pre-processing item by the first comparison, the execution of the post-processing item of the one test case corresponding to the matching pre-processing item and the matching pre-processing item of the next test case And a procedure determining unit (112) for instructing the test execution unit to perform the test of the one test case and the next test case. . When the procedure determination unit determines that the first comparison result and the operating conditions of the respective pre-processing items all match between the one test case and the next test case, the advance test of the next test case is performed. The mobile object according to claim 1 or 2 , wherein execution of all pre-processing items in the processing procedure is omitted and execution of all post-processing items in the post-processing procedure of the one test case is omitted. Communication terminal test system. For each of the preprocessing items constituting the preprocessing procedure, a coefficient is added so that the higher the order of execution, the higher the priority, and the operation condition set along one preprocessing item is set. The same coefficient as that of the one pre-processing item is assigned to the post-processing item for returning to the known operating condition, and the execution processing procedure has a lower priority than the coefficient of any pre-processing item. The coefficient is attached to
The procedure determination unit, when the processing content comparison unit detects a preprocessing item having a different operating condition by the first comparison, has a different operating condition among the preprocessing items of the next test case. The execution of the preprocessing item to which the coefficient having the magnitude in the order direction opposite to the order direction is omitted from the same coefficient as the coefficient of the preprocessing item immediately before detecting the preprocessing item, and the one test case The execution of the post-processing item having the same coefficient as that of the omitted pre-processing item in the next test case is omitted from the post-processing items. 4. The mobile communication terminal test system according to any one of 3 above. In the pre-test stage, a plurality of pre-processing items, each of which is divided into items for each execution unit, are executed for setting a plurality of test apparatuses from the respective known operating conditions to the operating conditions according to the contents of the various tests. A pre-processing procedure arranged in order; an execution processing procedure for executing the test itself; and a processing executed after the execution processing procedure and processed in the reverse order of the pre-processing procedure, A mobile communication terminal test system that executes the test along the test case, with a post-processing procedure in which a plurality of post-processing items for returning the operating condition to the known operating condition as a set of test cases. The test method used,
The plurality of test cases in the plurality of test cases so that the time for processing all the test cases is maximized based on the operation condition corresponding to the one pre-processing item of each test case. The processing time difference is calculated from the difference between the maximum processing time when the test cases are rearranged and the minimum processing time when the plurality of test cases are rearranged so that the processing time for all the test cases is minimized. A processing time difference calculating step;
A reordering step of determining the order of the plurality of test cases as an execution order so as to be the minimum processing time for at least the preprocessing item having the largest processing time difference, and rearranging the order of execution of the plurality of test cases. When,
Before starting the test for one test case to be executed, for each pre-processing item in each pre-processing procedure between the one test case and the test case to be executed next to the one test case. A procedure comparison step that compares the operation conditions included in the pre-processing procedure in the order of the pre-processing procedures and performs a first comparison until there is a pre-processing item that does not match the operating conditions, or until all of the pre-processing items match,
A pre-processing item in the pre-processing procedure of the next test case when all the operating conditions of the pre-processing items match between the one test case and the next test case. A test method comprising: a step of omitting execution of all steps and omitting execution of all post-processing items in the post-processing procedure of the one test case. In the rearranging step, the pre-processing item having the smallest processing time difference is based on the execution order of the plurality of test cases having the minimum processing time, and the previous processing item having a larger processing time difference from the pre-processing item having a smaller processing time difference. The plurality of test cases are rearranged in the order of the processing items, and the pre-processing items for which the test cases are rearranged later are arranged in the order of execution of the test cases rearranged first and the test cases later. The test method according to claim 5 , wherein the execution order of the plurality of test cases is rearranged by rearranging based on the operation condition corresponding to the preprocessing item to be changed. Prior to the rearranging step, a coefficient is added to each preprocessing item constituting the preprocessing procedure so that the priority is higher as the execution order is earlier, and one preprocessing item is set. For the post-processing item for returning the set operation condition to the known operation condition, the same coefficient as that of the one pre-processing item is attached, and the coefficient of any pre-processing item is assigned to the execution processing procedure. A coefficient setting step of attaching a coefficient so that the priority is lower than
In the step of omitting the procedure, when a preprocess item having a different operation condition is detected by the first comparison, a preprocess item having a different operation condition is detected from the preprocess items of the next test case. Execution of the pre-processing item to which the coefficient of the order direction opposite to the order direction is omitted from the same coefficient as the coefficient of the immediately preceding pre-processing item is omitted, and the post-processing item of the one test case is omitted. 7. The test method according to claim 5 , wherein execution of the post-processing item having the same coefficient as the omitted pre-processing item is omitted from the next test case.