Wireless device parallel test scheduling method and system

Abstract

This invention relates to the field of wireless communication device testing, specifically to a method and system for parallel test scheduling of wireless devices. The method includes: acquiring identifiers of multiple wireless nodes under test; dynamically associating and assigning the identifiers to multiple corresponding test proxy nodes to coordinate the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification between the multiple test proxy nodes and the multiple wireless nodes under test. The system includes a test control node, multiple test proxy nodes, and multiple wireless nodes under test; the test control node is configured to perform the aforementioned dynamic association allocation and parallel coordination. This invention achieves parallel verification of multi-device wireless RF links through dynamic association allocation and multiplexing scheduling mechanisms, significantly improving the efficiency and concurrency robustness of large-scale production testing.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of wireless communication device testing, and more specifically to a method and system for scheduling parallel tests of wireless devices. Background Technology

[0002] Currently, in the mass production testing of wireless communication devices (such as Bluetooth modules), serial testing architectures or simple interface expansion architectures are typically used. Existing solutions mainly verify the device under test (DUT) by acquiring its identifier and establishing a connection one by one through test control nodes, or by simply expanding hardware interfaces to enable multiple device access without a dynamic scheduling mechanism. This testing mode has significant technical drawbacks: on the one hand, the serial testing process results in long single-test cycles and extremely low overall testing efficiency, failing to meet the high throughput requirements of mass production; on the other hand, while simple static interface expansion can access multiple devices, it cannot solve the problems of efficient dynamic matching and concurrent communication conflicts between multiple test agents and multiple DUTs, lacking the ability to parallel schedule and verify the wireless RF link. This leads to poor robustness of the test system in multi-device concurrent scenarios and makes it difficult to simulate real multi-device concurrent interference environments. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a testing solution that can achieve efficient parallel scheduling of multiple devices and RF link verification. Summary of the Invention

[0003] To address the issues of low efficiency and poor concurrency robustness in large-scale production testing caused by the lack of multi-device parallel scheduling and RF link verification mechanisms in existing technologies, this application proposes a wireless device parallel test scheduling method and system. This method dynamically associates and assigns multiple wireless nodes under test to corresponding test agent nodes, and coordinates parallel bidirectional data loopback verification through a multiplexing scheduling mechanism. This achieves efficient parallel automated verification and improved concurrency robustness of multi-device wireless RF links.

[0004] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention adopts the following technical solution: A method for scheduling parallel testing of wireless devices includes: acquiring the identifiers of multiple wireless nodes under test; dynamically associating and allocating the identifiers of the multiple wireless nodes under test to multiple corresponding test proxy nodes, so as to coordinate the multiple test proxy nodes and the multiple wireless nodes under test to perform bidirectional data loopback verification in parallel.

[0005] The above solution breaks through the bottleneck of traditional serial testing or static extended testing by dynamically associating multiple wireless nodes under test with multiple test agent nodes and coordinating the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification. It realizes dynamic matching of test resources and parallel verification of wireless RF links of multiple devices, which greatly improves the throughput efficiency and concurrency robustness of large-scale production testing.

[0006] As one implementation method, the identifiers of the multiple wireless nodes under test are dynamically associated and assigned to the corresponding multiple test agent nodes, including: matching the identifiers of the wireless nodes under test with the identifiers of the test agent nodes, or assigning them based on the load status of the test agent nodes.

[0007] The above solution achieves precise scheduling and load balancing of test agent resources by dynamically allocating resources based on identifier matching or load status. This avoids the waste of resources by overloading some test agents while leaving others idle, and further improves the overall operating efficiency and stability of the parallel testing system.

[0008] As one implementation method, a multiplexing scheduling mechanism is used to allocate independent communication resources to each wireless node under test to achieve the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification; the multiplexing scheduling mechanism is a time-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism, which allocates an independent time slot to each wireless node under test to perform the bidirectional data loopback verification within the independent time slot.

[0009] The above scheme allocates an independent time slot to each wireless node under test through a time-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism, which effectively avoids the risk of wireless channel conflicts and data collisions when multiple devices communicate concurrently, ensures the isolation and accuracy of data transmission of each node during parallel testing, and improves the reliability of concurrent testing of multiple devices.

[0010] As one implementation, after obtaining the identifiers of multiple wireless nodes under test and before the dynamic association and allocation, the multiple wireless nodes under test are verified by a trusted verification module; only the identifiers of wireless nodes under test that have passed the trusted verification are dynamically associated and allocated to the corresponding test agent nodes.

[0011] The above solution effectively intercepts nodes with illegitimate identities or damaged firmware by introducing trusted verification before dynamic association allocation, thus avoiding the occupation and interference of test agent resources by invalid or malicious nodes and ensuring the security and purity of the parallel test scheduling environment.

[0012] As one implementation method, the trusted verification module performs trusted verification on the plurality of wireless nodes under test, including: authenticating the identity of the wireless nodes under test to verify the legality of their identity identifiers; performing firmware integrity verification on the wireless nodes under test to verify whether the integrity metric of their firmware image is consistent with the pre-stored baseline value; the test data in the bidirectional data loopback verification is encrypted by the trusted verification module and then sent out, and after the wireless nodes under test send back the encrypted data, the trusted verification module decrypts it and verifies the trusted verification value; the method also outputs trusted security test results, which include identity authentication results, firmware integrity verification results, and trusted verification value verification results.

[0013] The above scheme constructs an end-to-end security protection link from node access to data transmission through a multi-dimensional trusted verification mechanism that includes identity authentication, firmware integrity verification, and encrypted data loopback verification. This not only ensures the legitimacy of the identity and firmware of the node under test, but also guarantees the confidentiality and integrity of the test data during transmission, achieving high reliability and traceability of the test results.

[0014] As one implementation method, coordinating the multiple test agent nodes and the multiple wireless nodes under test to perform bidirectional data loopback verification in parallel includes: the test control node sending test data to the test agent node, which then transmits the data to the wireless node under test; the wireless node under test transmitting the received test data back to the test control node via the test agent node; and the test control node verifying whether the transmitted data is consistent with the original test data.

[0015] The above scheme constructs a closed-loop RF link verification path by testing the transparent transmission role of the agent node and the data loopback comparison mechanism. This enables the test control node to accurately quantify and evaluate the wireless transceiver function and link quality of the wireless node under test, and realizes automated and objective verification of the core functions of wireless communication.

[0016] As one implementation method, during the bidirectional data loopback verification process, the test control node controls an external interference source to transmit an interference signal of controllable strength in the current communication channel; and records the data transmission stability index of the wireless node under test under interference conditions.

[0017] The above scheme simulates a real and harsh wireless communication environment by injecting a controllable strength of interference signal and recording stability indicators during the verification process. This enables the test system to quantitatively evaluate the communication robustness of the wireless node under test under interference conditions, thereby selecting high-quality products with high anti-interference capabilities and improving the reliability of products in complex application scenarios.

[0018] Furthermore, the present invention also provides a parallel test scheduling system for wireless devices, including a test control node, multiple test proxy nodes, and multiple wireless nodes under test; the test control node is configured to obtain the identifiers of the multiple wireless nodes under test and dynamically associate and allocate the identifiers to the corresponding multiple test proxy nodes, so as to coordinate the multiple test proxy nodes and the multiple wireless nodes under test to perform bidirectional data loopback verification in parallel.

[0019] The above solution provides solid hardware and logic support for multi-device parallel test scheduling methods by constructing a system architecture that includes a test control node, multiple test agent nodes, and multiple wireless nodes under test, and configuring dynamic association allocation and parallel coordination functions in the test control node, thereby realizing efficient parallel scheduling and RF verification of multiple devices at the system level.

[0020] As one implementation, it also includes a multi-channel serial port expansion unit; the test control node connects to the plurality of wireless nodes under test through the multi-channel serial port expansion unit.

[0021] The above solution, by introducing a multi-channel serial port expansion unit, breaks the limitation of the number of physical interfaces of the test control node itself, realizes centralized access and management of a large-scale wireless node cluster under test by a single test control node, reduces hardware investment costs and production line footprint, and improves the scalability and economy of the system.

[0022] As one implementation, a trusted verification module is also included; the test control node performs trusted verification on the plurality of wireless nodes under test through the trusted verification module, and dynamically associates and assigns the identifiers of the wireless nodes under test that have passed the trusted verification to the corresponding test agent nodes.

[0023] The above solution adds a trusted verification module to the system, which builds a front-end security filtering barrier for the parallel test scheduling system, ensuring that only legitimate and intact nodes under test enter the parallel test process, thereby improving the security protection level and the effectiveness of resource allocation of the test system. Beneficial effects

[0024] 1. This invention breaks through the bottlenecks of traditional serial testing or static interface expansion by dynamically associating the identifiers of multiple wireless nodes under test (DUTs) with corresponding multiple test agent nodes and coordinating parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification. The dynamic association and allocation mechanism enables test agent resources to be flexibly matched and load-balanced according to the DUT status or identifier, avoiding resource idleness and overload. The reuse scheduling mechanism allocates independent communication resources to each DUT to avoid concurrency conflicts, thereby reducing the average test time per device from minutes in traditional solutions to seconds. This achieves efficient parallel automated verification of multi-device wireless RF links and significantly improves the throughput efficiency of large-scale production testing.

[0025] 2. This invention simulates co-channel interference scenarios in real complex environments by controlling the external interference source to emit interference signals of controllable strength and recording stability indicators during the bidirectional data loopback verification process. This enables the test system to quantitatively evaluate the stability indicators of the wireless node under test, such as packet loss rate and retransmission count, under gradient interference, thereby accurately selecting high-quality products with high anti-interference capabilities and improving the communication robustness of the products under harsh application scenarios.

[0026] 3. This invention uses a trusted verification module to perform identity authentication, firmware integrity verification, and encrypted data loopback verification on the wireless nodes under test. This constructs an end-to-end security protection link from node access to data transmission, effectively intercepting the occupation of test resources by illegal or damaged nodes, ensuring the confidentiality and integrity of test data, and achieving high reliability and traceability of test results. This provides a solid foundation for big data analysis and traceability of production quality. Attached Figure Description

[0027] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of a single agent and single node under test system architecture according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0028] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of a single agent and single node under test wireless connection according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0029] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the system architecture of the multi-agent multi-test node and dual multi-channel serial port expansion unit according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0030] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of a wireless connection between multiple agents and multiple nodes under test according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0031] Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of a multi-agent, multi-test node system architecture for a fusion trusted verification module according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0032] Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of a multi-agent, multi-test node system architecture that integrates external interference sources according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0033] Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of multi-channel switching connection according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0034] Among them, 10-test control node, 20-test agent node, 30-wireless node under test, 40-multi-channel serial port expansion unit, 50-trusted verification module, and 60-external interference source. Detailed Implementation

[0035] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of this invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some, not all, of the embodiments of this invention. All other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art based on the embodiments of this invention without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this invention.

[0036] Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains. The terms “comprising,” “including,” etc., used in this invention and its claims are open-ended expressions, meaning they include but are not limited to, and do not exclude other unlisted elements. The terms “first,” “second,” etc., used herein are only for distinguishing similar objects and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequence. Example 1

[0037] like Figure 1 and Figure 2 As shown, this embodiment provides a parallel test scheduling method for wireless devices. This method is mainly executed by the test control node 10 and is used to perform efficient parallel radio frequency function verification on multiple wireless nodes 30 under test in a large-scale production test scenario. The method of this embodiment includes the following core steps.

[0038] Step S100: Obtain the identifiers of multiple wireless nodes 30 under test. Specifically, the identifier of a wireless node 30 under test refers to data that uniquely represents the node's identity and communication addressing information. For example, in a Bluetooth communication scenario, the identifier can be a Media Access Control Address (MAC address); in other wireless communication scenarios such as Wi-Fi or Zigbee, the identifier can also be a device serial number, network IP address, or other agreed-upon unique identification code. The test control node 10 establishes an initial connection with the wireless nodes 30 under test via wired or wireless means, thereby reading and collecting the identification information of all online devices under test, providing a basic data source for subsequent scheduling and allocation.

[0039] Step S200 involves dynamically associating the identifiers of the plurality of wireless nodes under test 30 with corresponding test proxy nodes 20 to coordinate the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification between the multiple test proxy nodes 20 and the plurality of wireless nodes under test 30. Specifically, dynamic association and allocation means that the test control node 10 assigns the identifier of the wireless node under test 30 to a specific test proxy node 20 in real time based on the current test resource status and the status of the nodes under test, thus establishing a corresponding relationship. This allocation mechanism is not a static binding that remains unchanged, but can be flexibly adjusted according to the load of the test proxy node 20 or the access order of the wireless nodes under test 30. For example, when the number of devices under test currently connected to a certain test proxy node 20 reaches its limit or a failure occurs, the test control node 10 can dynamically allocate the identifier of a newly connected wireless node under test 30 to other idle test proxy nodes 20, thereby achieving load balancing and efficient utilization of test resources.

[0040] Coordinated parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification refers to the test control node 10 acting as a scheduling center, directing multiple test agent nodes 20 to synchronously conduct data transmission and reception tests with their respective associated wireless nodes under test 30 within the same time period. Bidirectional data loopback verification is a closed-loop RF link detection logic, where test data is sent from the control side, relayed through the agent side to the device under test, and then returned from the device under test to the control side for consistency comparison. The core mechanism behind this embodiment's use of a dynamic allocation and parallel execution architecture, rather than traditional static allocation or serial execution, is that static allocation cannot handle resource idleness and overload conflicts caused by frequent loading and unloading of equipment on the production line, while serial execution causes the test cycle to increase linearly with the number of devices. Through dynamic allocation, the system can adaptively match optimal test resources, avoiding bottlenecks; through parallel execution, the system breaks down the originally serial long-cycle task into multiple synchronously executable short-cycle tasks, significantly reducing the average test time per device from minutes to seconds, thereby achieving a non-linear qualitative improvement in overall throughput efficiency.

[0041] It should be understood that, although Figure 1 and Figure 2 This illustration only depicts the most basic architectural logic of a single agent and a single node under test, but the core concept of this invention is not limited to this. In other embodiments, the ratio of test agent nodes 20 to wireless nodes under test 30 can be arbitrarily expanded according to production line capacity requirements, as long as the test control node 10 can perform unified scheduling and parallel coordination of multiple pairs of associated combinations. The above embodiments are merely illustrative and not restrictive, aiming to establish an overall narrative framework for multi-device parallel scheduling and RF verification. Example 2

[0042] Building upon Example 1, this example elaborates on the specific implementation paths of the dynamic association allocation mechanism and the reuse scheduling mechanism. For example... Figure 3 and Figure 4 As shown, in a large-scale testing scenario with multiple agents and multiple test nodes, the test control node 10 dynamically associates and assigns the identifiers of the multiple test wireless nodes 30 to the corresponding multiple test agent nodes 20, including: matching the identifiers of the test wireless nodes 30 with the identifiers of the test agent nodes 20, or assigning them based on the load status of the test agent nodes 20.

[0043] Specifically, the identifier-based allocation path refers to the test control node 10 performing targeted binding based on a preset mapping relationship between the unique identifier of the wireless node under test 30 and the unique identifier of the test proxy node 20. For example, in a Bluetooth device testing scenario, the test control node 10 can use a hash mapping algorithm to map the MAC address of the wireless node under test 30 to a specific identifier of the test proxy node 20 after hashing, thereby achieving a fast and deterministic association. The core advantage of this identifier-based method lies in its strong deterministic allocation logic and minimal computational overhead, enabling millisecond-level resource allocation. It is particularly suitable for scenarios where there is a fixed test logic or frequency band correspondence between the node under test and the proxy node.

[0044] As an alternative approach, load-based allocation focuses on the balanced utilization of overall system resources. Test control node 10 monitors the current load status of each test agent node 20 in real time. This load status can be specifically reflected in parameters such as the number of currently connected wireless nodes under test, data throughput, CPU utilization, or memory usage. When a new batch of wireless nodes under test 30 comes online, test control node 10 does not allocate them according to a fixed mapping, but instead prioritizes assigning the nodes to the test agent node 20 with the lightest current load. For example, if test agent node A is currently associated with 2 nodes under test and has a CPU utilization of 30%, while test agent node B is currently associated with 5 nodes under test and has a CPU utilization of 80%, then the newly connected node under test will be dynamically allocated to test agent node A. The advantage of this allocation mechanism is that it can adaptively cope with load fluctuations caused by frequent loading and unloading of equipment on the production line, effectively avoiding the phenomenon of some agent nodes being overloaded, leading to test response delays or even crashes, while other agent nodes are idle. This achieves load balancing and efficient utilization of test resources at the system level.

[0045] After completing the dynamic association allocation, in order to coordinate the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification by multiple test agent nodes 20 and multiple wireless nodes under test 30, this embodiment allocates independent communication resources to each wireless node under test 30 through a multiplexing scheduling mechanism to achieve the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification. Specifically, the multiplexing scheduling mechanism is a time-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism, which allocates an independent time slot to each wireless node under test 30 to perform the bidirectional data loopback verification within the independent time slot.

[0046] The underlying logic of the time-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism lies in the resource slicing in the time dimension. Test control node 10 divides a complete test cycle into several time slices, each time slice being an independent time slot. These independent time slots are then allocated one by one to different wireless nodes 30 under test (DUTs) sharing the same test proxy node 20. Within the independent time slot allocated to a specific DUT, the DUT and its corresponding test proxy node exclusively occupy the wireless communication link for bidirectional data loopback verification. Other DUTs remain silent or wait until their assigned time slot arrives. The reason this embodiment uses an independent time slot time-division multiplexing mechanism instead of simple concurrent preemption is that the wireless communication link cannot simultaneously resolve multiple strong signals at the same frequency on the same physical channel. If multiple DUTs send data to the same proxy node at the same time, packet collisions and channel conflicts will inevitably occur, leading to a surge in bit error rate or even connection interruption. The independent time slot design completely isolates the communication windows of each DUT in the time dimension, fundamentally avoiding the risk of concurrent conflicts and ensuring the isolation and accuracy of data transmission between nodes during parallel testing.

[0047] It should be understood that although this embodiment focuses on describing the time-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism, this is not the only limitation on the multiplexing scheduling mechanism. As an equivalent alternative, the multiplexing scheduling mechanism can also be a frequency-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism, that is, the test control node 10 allocates an independent frequency band or communication channel to each wireless node under test 30, so that multiple nodes under test can simultaneously perform data loopback verification with the same test agent node on different frequency bands without generating co-channel interference. The frequency-division multiplexing mechanism can also effectively avoid concurrent conflicts in scenarios with sufficient spectrum resources, and it does not require waiting for time slot rotation, thus having a higher real-time concurrency. Those skilled in the art can flexibly choose time-division multiplexing or frequency-division multiplexing, or combine the two, according to the spectrum resource conditions of the actual wireless communication protocol and the hardware concurrent reception capability of the test agent node, as long as it can allocate independent communication resources to the nodes under test to avoid conflicts.

[0048] like Figure 3 and Figure 4As shown, in the actual runtime sequence of multiple agents and multiple nodes under test, the test control node 10 first obtains the identifiers of the wireless nodes under test C, D, E, F, and G. Based on the identifier matching or load status allocation logic, nodes C and D are dynamically associated and assigned to test agent node A, and nodes E, F, and G are dynamically associated and assigned to test agent node B. Subsequently, the test control node 10 initiates time-division multiplexing scheduling, allocating time slot T1 to node C, time slot T2 to node D, time slot T3 to node E, and so on. Within time slot T1, test agent node A only performs bidirectional data loopback verification with the wireless node under test C; within time slot T2, test agent node A switches to verifying with the wireless node under test D, thus achieving parallel testing of multiple devices macroscopically and ensuring the stability and conflict-free nature of a single link microscopically. The above embodiments are illustrative only and not restrictive, aiming to illustrate the collaborative working principle and anti-circumvention alternatives of the dynamic association allocation and multiplexing scheduling mechanism in multi-device concurrent scenarios. Example 3

[0049] Building upon Example 1, this example further elaborates on the security protection mechanism of the testing process. In large-scale production testing, production line environments often face risks such as mixed equipment, firmware version conflicts, and even malicious device access. Directly assigning all identified wireless nodes 30 to test agent nodes 20 for parallel testing would not only waste valuable test agent resources but could also lead to eavesdropping or tampering of test data, rendering the test results unreliable. Therefore, as... Figure 5 As shown, in this embodiment, after obtaining the identifiers of multiple wireless nodes 30 to be tested and before dynamic association and allocation, the multiple wireless nodes 30 to be tested are verified by the trusted verification module 50; only the identifiers of the wireless nodes 30 to be tested that have passed the trusted verification are dynamically associated and allocated to the corresponding test agent nodes 20.

[0050] Specifically, the trusted verification module 50 acts as a front-end security filter in the system. After reading the identifier of the wireless node under test 30, the test control node 10 does not immediately perform the allocation operation, but first submits these identifiers and related device information to the trusted verification module 50 for admission review. Only those nodes under test that are determined by the trusted verification module 50 to be legitimate and intact will have their identifiers allowed to enter the subsequent dynamic association allocation pool, while nodes that fail verification will be directly removed or marked as abnormal, thereby avoiding invalid or malicious nodes occupying and interfering with the test proxy node 20, and ensuring the security and purity of the parallel test scheduling environment.

[0051] Furthermore, the trusted verification module 50 performs trusted verification on the plurality of wireless nodes under test 30, including two key review dimensions: authenticating the identity of the wireless nodes under test 30 to verify the legality of their identity identifiers; and verifying the firmware integrity of the wireless nodes under test 30 to verify whether the integrity metric of their firmware image is consistent with the pre-stored benchmark value.

[0052] For identity authentication, the trusted verification module 50 verifies whether the identifier reported by the wireless node under test 30 belongs to the pre-set whitelist, or whether its identifier format conforms to the factory-agreed encoding rules. For example, in Bluetooth device testing, the module checks whether the OUI (Organization Unique Identifier) ​​prefix of the MAC address is a legitimate vendor code, and whether the entire MAC address is within the registered serial number range. The underlying mechanism of this step is that by verifying the legitimacy of the source identity, it can effectively intercept non-target devices or cloned devices with counterfeit identifiers that have infiltrated the production line, preventing them from occupying the test channel.

[0053] For firmware integrity verification, the trusted verification module 50 requires the wireless node under test 30 to perform a self-measurement of its internally stored firmware image, such as calculating a SHA-256 hash value, and report this integrity metric. The trusted verification module 50 then rigorously compares this metric with a benchmark value pre-stored in the security database. If the two do not match, it indicates that the firmware of the node under test may have been corrupted, injected with malicious code, or simply a version flashing error. This verification mechanism based on comparing the metric with the benchmark ensures the immutability and consistency of the operating logic of the node under test from the data layer, providing an effective shield against firmware-level security threats.

[0054] After completing the access review, this embodiment further strengthens the encryption of the data transmission process for bidirectional data loopback verification. The test data in the bidirectional data loopback verification is encrypted by the trusted verification module 50 and then sent out. After the wireless node under test 30 sends the encrypted data back, the trusted verification module 50 decrypts it and verifies the trusted check value.

[0055] Specifically, traditional plaintext data loopback only verifies the reachability of data bits. However, in complex production line electromagnetic environments or scenarios with potential eavesdropping risks, plaintext test data is easily intercepted by malicious receivers on the same frequency band, or tampered with and re-injected by a man-in-the-middle attack, resulting in the test control node 10 receiving contaminated data and thus misjudging the situation. To address this issue, the trusted verification module 50 encrypts the original test data using a pre-shared key or asymmetric encryption algorithm before sending the test data, and appends a Message Authentication Code (MAC) or Hash-based Message Authentication Code (HMAC) as a trusted verification value to the data packet. After receiving the encrypted data, the wireless node 30 does not need to decrypt the content but directly sends back the entire encrypted data packet as is. Upon receiving the returned data, the trusted verification module 50 first decrypts it, then recalculates the trusted verification value of the decrypted data and compares it with the original verification value. If the verification values ​​match, it proves that the data has not been tampered with by any third party in the wireless transmission link; if they do not match, it indicates that the link has suffered a man-in-the-middle attack or that the data has been unexpectedly damaged. The core principle of this encrypted loopback mechanism is to combine the verification of data content with the verification of the credibility of the data source. This not only prevents eavesdropping and ensures data confidentiality, but also prevents tampering and ensures data integrity and authenticity, thus building an end-to-end security protection link.

[0056] Finally, the method also outputs trusted security test results, including identity authentication results, firmware integrity verification results, and trusted verification value verification results. This multi-dimensional output enables production managers to not only know the on / off status of the device's RF link but also accurately grasp the device's security health, providing a highly reliable data foundation for big data analysis and traceability of production quality. It should be understood that although this embodiment describes in detail the specific implementation logic based on hash metrics and HMAC verification, this is only illustrative and not restrictive. In other embodiments, identity authentication can also use digital certificate verification, firmware integrity can use CRC verification, and encryption loopback can use symmetric encryption algorithms such as AES, as long as it can achieve defense-in-depth from node access to data transmission. Example 4

[0057] Building upon Example 1, this example elaborates on the specific timing logic and role bindings for parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification. Coordinating the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification by the multiple test proxy nodes 20 and the multiple wireless nodes under test 30 includes the following three key actions: the test control node 10 sends test data to the test proxy node 20, which then transmits it to the wireless node under test 30; the wireless node under test 30 transmits the received test data back to the test control node 10 via the test proxy node 20; and the test control node 10 verifies whether the transmitted data is consistent with the original test data.

[0058] Specifically, the "transparent transmission" referred to in this embodiment means that in the data transmission path, the intermediate node is only responsible for forwarding the data packets at the physical layer or protocol stack level, without parsing, modifying, or reconstructing the application layer content of the data packets. At the hardware implementation level, the test agent node 20 acts as a pure wireless relay station in this process. Its internal data forwarding logic is configured as follows: once a test data frame is received from the wired interface of the test control node 10, it immediately encapsulates it into an air interface data packet according to a preset wireless communication protocol (such as Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.) and broadcasts it; conversely, once a wireless data packet returned by the wireless node under test 30 is received from the air interface, it immediately decapsulates it and sends it back to the test control node 10 as is through the wired interface. In this mode, the central processing unit or baseband chip of the test agent node 20 does not perform any application layer payload reading or verification operations, thereby minimizing data processing latency.

[0059] The reason this embodiment uses a transparent transmission method between the test proxy node 20 and the test control node 10 instead of direct end-to-end communication between them is to simulate a real wireless link. In actual applications of mass production, the wireless node 30 ultimately needs to communicate with various real wireless terminal devices, rather than directly interacting with a wired host like the test control node 10. If the test control node 10 communicates directly with the node under test, it often needs to have its own wireless transceiver capabilities. This not only increases the hardware cost and complexity of the test control node, but more importantly, this direct connection mode bypasses the physical characteristics of the real wireless environment, such as spatial propagation attenuation, multipath effects, and co-channel interference. This makes the test environment too idealized and unable to effectively expose potential problems such as poor antenna matching and abnormal RF front-end gain that may exist in the node under test under a real RF link. By introducing test agent node 20 as a transparent transmission relay, the test data must undergo two physical medium conversions, "wired to wireless" and "wireless to wired," and one spatial wireless propagation, which fully reproduces the radio frequency transceiver link of the device under test in actual use, so that the closed-loop verification results can truly reflect the wireless communication quality of the device under test.

[0060] like Figure 2 or Figure 4 As shown in the wireless connection logic, under a single agent single test node or multiple agent multiple test nodes architecture, the timing process of bidirectional data loopback verification is as follows: Step S401, the test control node 10 generates an original test data packet, which may contain a preset pseudo-random sequence or a specific parity matrix, and sends it to the dynamically associated test agent node 20 via a wired link such as a serial port or USB; Step S402, after receiving the wired data, the test agent node 20 starts the transparent transmission mode and sends the data unchanged to the corresponding wireless node 30 under test via the wireless radio frequency link; Step S403, the wireless node under test... The wireless receiver of node 30 captures the air data packet and extracts its application layer payload as is, then transmits it back to test agent node 20 via its own wireless transmitter; in step S404, test agent node 20 transmits the received wireless backhaul data again and forwards it back to test control node 10 via wired link; in step S405, test control node 10 performs a bit-by-bit or packet-by-packet consistency comparison between the finally received backhaul data and the original test data generated in step S401. If they are completely consistent, the closed-loop RF link function of the wireless node 30 under test is determined to be normal; if there are bit errors or packet loss, it is determined to be abnormal.

[0061] It should be understood that although this embodiment describes in detail the hardware role and unidirectional timing logic of the test agent node 20 as a transparent relay, this is only illustrative and not restrictive. In other embodiments, the test agent node 20 may also add lightweight link layer status monitoring functions during transparent transmission, such as recording the received signal strength indication or link quality indication of the wireless packet, and reporting these auxiliary indicators to the test control node 10 along with the returned data, as long as the original content of the application layer test data is not changed. In addition, the specific form of the test data is not limited to a specific pseudo-random sequence; any data payload with comparable characteristics is applicable. The above embodiments aim to illustrate the irreplaceable nature of the transparent transmission mechanism and its underlying hardware support logic in closed-loop RF verification. Example 5

[0062] Building upon the bidirectional data loopback verification process in Example 4, this example further elaborates on the anti-interference quantitative evaluation mechanism of the test system. In actual large-scale production and final application scenarios, wireless communication devices often do not operate in an ideal silent electromagnetic environment, but constantly face radio frequency interference from other wireless devices in the same frequency band (such as Wi-Fi routers, microwave ovens, and other Bluetooth devices). Verifying loopback success only in an interference-free environment cannot truly reflect the device's communication robustness in complex scenarios. Therefore, during the bidirectional data loopback verification process, if... Figure 6As shown, the test control node 10 controls the external interference source 60 to transmit an interference signal of controllable strength in the current communication channel; and records the data transmission stability index of the wireless node 30 under the interference environment.

[0063] Specifically, the external interference source 60 is a radio frequency signal transmitting device precisely controlled by the test control node 10, and its transmission frequency band covers the operating frequency band of the wireless node under test 30. For example, in a Bluetooth device testing scenario, the external interference source 60 can be a programmable Wi-Fi signal transmitter or a Bluetooth jamming transmitter, whose transmission frequency can be precisely locked to a specific channel in the 2.4GHz frequency band where Bluetooth operates. Controllable strength means that the transmission power of the interference signal is quantitatively adjusted by the test control node 10 through command parameters (such as attenuation values ​​or power levels), rather than simply being turned on or off. This controllability is a prerequisite for establishing objective evaluation standards, because uncontrollable random interference cannot be used to construct repeatable and comparable quantitative test benchmarks.

[0064] This embodiment focuses on illustrating the gradient of interference intensity. During the test process, the test control node 10 does not apply interference of a single intensity, but rather controls the external interference source 60 to emit interference signals of different intensities sequentially according to a preset gradient increment sequence. For example, the gradient sequence can be set to three increasing power levels: -70dBm, -50dBm, and -30dBm. -70dBm simulates weak interference from distant co-channel devices in a typical office environment; -50dBm simulates moderate interference from close-range co-channel devices in a home or factory environment; and -30dBm simulates the extreme scenario of a strong co-channel interference source approaching under extremely harsh conditions. The reason this embodiment uses gradient increment testing instead of a single intensity test is that the device's RF receiver has automatic gain control and noise floor suppression capabilities. Under weak interference, it may still maintain error-free transmission, but as the interference intensity crosses a certain threshold, the receiver's signal-to-noise ratio will deteriorate sharply, leading to a non-linear spike in the bit error rate. Through gradient incremental testing, the system can accurately capture the robustness boundary inflection point of the wireless node under test 30 from normal operation to failure, thereby screening out high-quality chips or modules that can still maintain stable communication under critical interference thresholds, rather than just screening out edge products that barely pass under ideal conditions.

[0065] At each level of interference intensity, test control node 10 performs a complete bidirectional data loopback verification and records the data transmission stability indicators of the wireless node under test 30. These indicators include, but are not limited to: packet loss rate, i.e., the proportion of packets that fail to be successfully transmitted out of the total transmitted packets; retransmission count, i.e., the cumulative number of times the transmitter retransmits the same packet due to the receiver's failure to acknowledge; and received signal strength indication variance, i.e., the dispersion of the signal strength values ​​reported by the wireless node under test 30 under interference. These indicators characterize the degree of erosion of link quality by interference from different dimensions.

[0066] To establish an objective evaluation standard for anti-interference capability, this embodiment also provides a comparison model without interference as a benchmark. Before entering the gradient interference test, the test control node 10 first performs a bidirectional data loopback verification in a silent environment without external interference source 60 transmission, and records the benchmark values ​​of the above-mentioned stability indicators. Typically, in a silent environment, the packet loss rate should be 0, the number of retransmissions should be 0 or extremely low, and the RSSI fluctuation variance should be extremely small. The indicator values ​​recorded under subsequent gradient interference levels are compared with this benchmark value, and the deviation represents the degree of attenuation of the anti-interference capability of the node under test. This quantitative evaluation with benchmark comparison makes the anti-interference performance of different batches and models of wireless nodes under test 30 comparable horizontally, completely avoiding the ambiguity of traditional subjective judgment or qualitative description.

[0067] It should be understood that while the above examples list specific gradient values ​​of -70dBm, -50dBm, and -30dBm, these are merely illustrative and not restrictive. In other embodiments, the gradient of interference intensity can be customized according to the severity of the actual application scenario of the device under test, such as adding a weak interference level of -90dBm or an extremely strong interference level of -20dBm, as long as the requirement of quantifying the inflection point of robustness boundary is met. Furthermore, the form of the interference signal is not limited to continuous co-frequency carriers; it can also be pulsed Wi-Fi data stream interference or Bluetooth frequency hopping interference simulating real traffic flow to more closely resemble harsh real-world environments.

[0068] like Figure 7As shown in the multi-channel switching logic, the injection of interference signals is not global diffusion, but can be precisely implemented on specific channels. Test control node 10 can control the external interference source 60 to transmit interference only on the preset wireless channel currently performing loopback verification (such as channel 18, channel 37, or channel 39), while remaining silent on other channels. This channel-level precise interference injection logic allows the test system to evaluate the anti-interference differences of the wireless node under test 30 at different frequency points, because the filtering characteristics of the RF front-end may be inconsistent at different frequency points. By synchronously switching the transmission channel of the interference source during multi-channel switching verification, the system can construct a three-dimensional anti-interference quantitative evaluation matrix with full-band, multi-gradient, and benchmark comparison, achieving ultimate verification of the communication robustness of wireless devices. The above embodiments aim to illustrate the irreplaceable role of controllable gradient interference and benchmark comparison in the quantitative evaluation of anti-interference capabilities. Example 6

[0069] like Figure 1-4 As shown, this embodiment provides a parallel test scheduling system for wireless devices. This system is the hardware carrier and logical execution entity for the method steps in embodiments 1 to 5 described above. The system includes a test control node 10, multiple test proxy nodes 20, and multiple wireless nodes under test 30.

[0070] Specifically, the test control node 10 is the central brain of the entire parallel test scheduling system. Its physical form can be a personal computer host, an industrial control computer, or a cloud server. It is mainly responsible for the orchestration of test logic, the generation and comparison of test data, and the scheduling and allocation of global resources. Multiple test agent nodes 20 are front-line execution units distributed on the test site. Their physical form can be independent wireless communication modules (such as Bluetooth host modules, Wi-Fi dongles) or embedded terminals with wireless transceiver capabilities. They are controlled by the test control node 10 and act as relay bridges for wireless links. Multiple wireless nodes under test 30 are batch wireless devices waiting for factory inspection on the production line, such as Bluetooth modules, Zigbee sensors, or Wi-Fi terminals. They perform initial configuration interaction with the test control node 10 through wired interfaces and perform RF function verification with the test agent nodes 20 through wireless interfaces.

[0071] In terms of connectivity, the test control node 10 establishes physical connections with multiple test agent nodes 20 and multiple wireless nodes under test 30 via a wired data bus (e.g., a universal serial bus or serial communication interface), thereby enabling it to directly read the identification information of the wireless nodes under test 30 and issue scheduling commands and test data to the test agent nodes 20. Simultaneously, multiple test agent nodes 20 and multiple wireless nodes under test 30 establish logical connections via a wireless air interface to perform the transmission and reception of radio frequency data. It should be understood that although... Figure 1-4The topology shown is that the test control node 10 is connected to multiple nodes through a specific interface extension unit. However, in other embodiments, the test control node 10 may also have a sufficient number of native physical interfaces to connect to all nodes, or connect to each node through a local area network, as long as the test control node 10 can perform stable data interaction with each node.

[0072] In terms of functional configuration, the test control node 10 is configured to acquire the identifiers of the plurality of wireless nodes under test 30 and dynamically associate and assign the identifiers to the corresponding plurality of test agent nodes 20, so as to coordinate the plurality of test agent nodes 20 and the plurality of wireless nodes under test 30 to perform bidirectional data loopback verification in parallel. This configuration logic is the core difference between this system architecture and traditional static test racks. Traditional test racks often adopt a one-to-one static binding, that is, one test agent is fixedly connected to one node under test. When a test agent fails or the loading and unloading rhythm of the node under test is mismatched, the system cannot adaptively adjust, resulting in idle resources or test blockage. In this embodiment, the test control node 10 runs a dynamic scheduling engine. This engine monitors the load status and connection capability of each test agent node 20 in real time, and flexibly assigns the node under test to the current optimal test agent according to the identifier characteristics or access order of the wireless node under test 30. For example, when nodes C and D come online, if the load on test proxy node A is light, C and D will be dynamically assigned to A; when nodes E, F, and G come online, if the load on test proxy node B is light, E, F, and G will be dynamically assigned to B. This dynamic allocation mechanism maximizes system resource utilization and avoids local overload or idleness.

[0073] Simultaneously, test control node 10 is also configured to coordinate the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification. At the macro-level timing, test control node 10 simultaneously issues test start commands to multiple test agent nodes 20, enabling each agent node to conduct loopback tests with its associated node under test within the same time period. This compresses the originally serial, long-cycle task into a parallel, short-cycle task, achieving a non-linear improvement in the overall system throughput efficiency. At the micro-level timing, test control node 10, through built-in multiplexing scheduling logic (such as time-division multiplexing or frequency-division multiplexing), allocates independent communication resource windows to multiple nodes under test sharing the same test agent node, ensuring that the wireless links do not interfere with each other during the parallel process.

[0074] This embodiment constructs a system architecture comprising a test control node, multiple test proxy nodes, and multiple wireless nodes under test (DUTs). It configures dynamic association allocation and parallel coordination functions within the test control node, providing robust hardware and logical support for multi-device parallel test scheduling methods. The micro-mechanism of this multi-proxy, multi-DUT architecture design lies in decoupling the control logic from the RF execution logic. The test control node focuses on scheduling and comparison, while the test proxy nodes focus on wireless relay. This allows the system to linearly scale its parallel verification capabilities by increasing the number of test proxy nodes when facing a large cluster of DUTs, without increasing the computational burden on the test control node. This achieves efficient parallel scheduling and elastic scaling of RF verification for multiple devices at the system level. The above embodiment is illustrative only, not restrictive, and aims to establish a general architectural narrative framework at the system level. Example 7

[0075] Building upon Example 6, this example further elaborates on the hardware expansion and security architecture of the parallel test scheduling system for wireless devices. In large-scale production testing scenarios, the number of native physical interfaces possessed by the test control node 10 is often limited. For example, a typical industrial control computer is usually equipped with only a few general-purpose serial bus interfaces or serial communication interfaces. If only these native physical interfaces are used to directly connect the wireless nodes under test 30, when the production line needs to test dozens or even hundreds of devices simultaneously, the interface bottleneck of the test control node 10 will directly prevent the system's parallel scheduling capability from being implemented. Therefore, the system in this example also includes a multi-channel serial port expansion unit 40; the test control node 10 connects to the multiple wireless nodes under test 30 through the multi-channel serial port expansion unit 40.

[0076] Specifically, such as Figure 3 and Figure 4 As shown, the multi-port serial port expansion unit 40 acts as an interface multiplier in the physical topology. The test control node 10 is connected to the aggregation end of the multi-port serial port expansion unit 40 through a single high-bandwidth uplink interface (e.g., the connection link represented by the label COM2 or CCM2), while the downlink end of the multi-port serial port expansion unit 40 splits into multiple independent downlink physical interfaces, which are respectively connected to the wireless node under test 30 (e.g., ...). Figure 3The test nodes 30C, 30D, 30E, 30F, and 30G are included in this embodiment. The microscopic mechanism of this physical connection lies in the fact that the multi-channel serial port expansion unit 40 integrates multiplexing and protocol conversion logic. It can demultiplex the high-speed serial data stream sent by the test control node 10 into multiple low-speed independent data streams, which are then routed to each test node 30. Simultaneously, it multiplexes and aggregates the uplink data streams returned from each test node 30 and transmits them back to the test control node 10 via a single uplink. The core consideration for introducing the multi-channel serial port expansion unit 40 into the system architecture in this embodiment, rather than directly increasing the number of test control nodes 10, is to significantly reduce hardware costs while overcoming physical interface limitations. Adding test control node 10 means deploying more industrial computers or servers, which not only results in high hardware procurement costs but also occupies more physical space and power resources on the production line. However, the multi-channel serial port expansion unit 40, as a low-cost dedicated interface expansion hardware, can achieve linear or even super-linear expansion of the number of interfaces at extremely low marginal cost. This allows a single test control node 10 to centrally manage a large-scale cluster of nodes under test, thereby achieving the optimal balance between economy and scalability at the system level.

[0077] It should be understood that although the specific term "serial port expansion" is used in this embodiment and the accompanying drawings, this is for illustrative purposes only and not restrictive. In other embodiments, the multi-port serial port expansion unit 40 can also be replaced by a multi-port universal serial bus expander, a multi-port Ethernet switch, or any hardware device capable of enabling single-input multiple-output physical interface splitting, as long as it can meet the functional requirements of the test control node 10 to connect multiple wireless nodes under test 30.

[0078] After resolving the physical interface expansion issue, this embodiment further adds a pre-security filtering barrier to the system architecture. The system also includes a trusted verification module 50; the test control node 10 performs trusted verification on the plurality of wireless nodes under test 30 through the trusted verification module 50, and dynamically associates and assigns the identifiers of only the wireless nodes under test 30 that have passed the trusted verification to the corresponding test proxy node 20.

[0079] Specifically, the trusted verification module 50 is physically located and logically connected within the system on the necessary data interaction path between the test control node 10 and the wireless node under test 30, or it functions as an independent security coprocessor unit within the test control node 10. At the logical connection level, after obtaining the identifiers of the wireless node under test 30, the test control node 10 does not directly send these identifiers to the dynamic scheduling engine. Instead, it first redirects the data stream to the trusted verification module 50 for pre-screening. The trusted verification module 50 performs security logic such as identity authentication and firmware integrity verification, only allowing the dynamic scheduling engine to access legitimate node identifiers that have passed verification. The reason for adding the trusted verification module 50 to the system architecture in this embodiment is that, at a micro level, in an open or semi-open production line environment, malicious devices with forged identities or abnormal devices with damaged firmware may be mixed into the cluster of nodes under test. If these devices enter the dynamic association allocation pool directly without filtering, they will occupy valuable test agent node 20 resources and wireless communication time slots, not only causing delays in the test queuing of normal devices, but also potentially injecting forged data or launching malicious attacks into the test system, undermining the stability and credibility of the entire parallel test scheduling environment. The introduction of the trusted verification module 50 constructs a security filtering barrier with both physical and logical binding at the system architecture level, ensuring that the computing and communication resources consumed by subsequent dynamic association allocation and parallel verification operations are applied to legitimate and intact target objects, thereby fundamentally guaranteeing the effectiveness of system resource allocation and the immutability of test results.

[0080] It should be understood that although the trusted verification module 50 is described as an independent module unit in this embodiment, this is only illustrative and not restrictive. In other embodiments, the security logic of the trusted verification module 50 can also be integrated into the main processor of the test control node 10 to run in software form, or integrated into the internal multi-channel serial port expansion unit 40 as a hardware-level security gateway, as long as it can perform pre-tested trusted verification of the node under test and filter out illegal nodes. The above embodiments are intended to illustrate the physical structure binding and underlying supporting logic of the multi-channel serial port expansion unit and the trusted verification module in the system architecture. Example 8

[0081] Building upon embodiments 1 to 7 above, this embodiment applies the entire parallel testing scheduling method and system for wireless devices to a real production line scenario for large-scale production testing of Bluetooth modules, demonstrating the operational effectiveness and commercial value of the technical solution in a complex industrial environment. It should be understood that although this embodiment uses Bluetooth technology as an example for detailed explanation, this is merely illustrative and not restrictive. The core scheduling and verification architecture of this invention is also applicable to batch testing scenarios for other short-range wireless communication devices such as Wi-Fi and Zigbee.

[0082] In this scenario of large-scale production testing of Bluetooth modules, the aforementioned higher-level terms are specifically implemented as follows: Test control node 10 is specifically manifested as a PC host on the production line side, responsible for global scheduling and data processing; Test agent node 20 is specifically manifested as a Bluetooth HOST module, acting as a wireless radio frequency relay station; Wireless node under test 30 is specifically manifested as a Bluetooth device under test, i.e., a Bluetooth module or terminal waiting for factory inspection on the production line; Multi-channel serial port expansion unit 40 is specifically manifested as a USB serial port expander, used to overcome the limitation of the number of native USB interfaces of the PC host; Trusted verification module 50 can be manifested as a security authentication software process running in the PC host or an independent security chip; External interference source 60 is specifically manifested as a programmable WiFi jamming transmitter, used to simulate co-channel interference in the 2.4GHz band.

[0083] The complete production line automation process in this embodiment is as follows: Step S801: Loading and Identification of Bluetooth Devices Under Test. A batch of Bluetooth devices under test are placed on the test fixture by a production line robot or manually, and connected to a PC host via a USB data cable and a USB serial port extender. The PC host reads the Bluetooth MAC address of each Bluetooth device under test one by one via the serial port protocol, using it as its unique identifier.

[0084] Step S802, Pre-test Trusted Verification. After obtaining the MAC address, the PC host does not immediately allocate test resources. Instead, it calls the trusted verification module to conduct an access review of the Bluetooth device under test. First, identity authentication is performed to verify whether the OUI prefix of the MAC address belongs to a legitimate manufacturer, preventing cross-contamination in the production line. Then, firmware integrity verification is performed, requiring the Bluetooth device under test to calculate and report the SHA-256 hash value of its firmware image. The trusted verification module compares this value with a pre-stored baseline value to intercept abnormal devices with firmware flashing errors or injected malicious code. Only the MAC addresses of Bluetooth devices under test that have passed trusted verification are allowed into the subsequent allocation pool.

[0085] Step S803, Dynamic Association Allocation. The PC host dynamically allocates the allowed MAC addresses to the corresponding Bluetooth host modules based on the current load status of each Bluetooth host module (such as the number of connected devices or CPU utilization). For example, if Bluetooth host module A is currently under light load, the new MAC address will be allocated to module A first, thereby achieving load balancing of test resources and avoiding some modules being overloaded and queuing while other modules are idle.

[0086] Step S804: Time-division multiplexing scheduling and parallel loopback verification. The PC host uses a time-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism to allocate independent time slots for multiple Bluetooth devices under test (DUTs) sharing the same Bluetooth HOST module. Within their respective independent time slot windows, the PC host sends test data (such as a preset pseudo-random sequence AA BB) to the Bluetooth HOST module. The Bluetooth HOST module then transmits the data transparently to the corresponding DUT. After receiving the data, the DUT transmits it back to the Bluetooth HOST module, which then transmits it back to the PC host. The PC host compares the consistency between the transmitted data and the original data, thereby completing closed-loop RF link verification within a conflict-free time slot and achieving parallel testing of multiple devices on a macroscopic level.

[0087] Step S805, Multi-channel switching test. During the loopback verification process, the PC host controls the Bluetooth HOST module to switch between the Bluetooth device under test and multiple preset Bluetooth channels. For example, the loopback verification is repeatedly performed on channel 18 (center frequency 2.440GHz), channel 37 (center frequency 2.402GHz), and channel 39 (center frequency 2.480GHz) to comprehensively evaluate the RF transceiver quality of the device under test at different frequency points.

[0088] Step S806, Gradient Interference Immunity Test. While performing multi-channel loopback verification, the PC host controls the WiFi jammer to transmit jamming signals of controllable strength in the current communication channel. The jamming strength increases in a gradient of -70dBm, -50dBm, and -30dBm, simulating a real-world harsh environment from weak daily interference to extremely strong interference. The PC host records stability indicators such as packet loss rate, retransmission count, and RSSI fluctuation variance of the Bluetooth device under test at each level of interference, and compares these values ​​with baseline values ​​under interference-free conditions to quantitatively evaluate the device's interference immunity boundary.

[0089] Step S807: Output trusted security test results. After the test process is completed, the PC host outputs a trusted security test report that includes identity authentication results, firmware integrity verification results, loopback data consistency results, and anti-interference quantitative indicators, providing a highly reliable data foundation for production quality traceability.

[0090] Through the aforementioned automated process, this embodiment achieved unexpected technical results in a real production line environment. In traditional serial testing schemes, testing personnel need to use mobile phones to search for Bluetooth signals one by one and pair them for verification, with a single testing cycle lasting more than 120 seconds, and hardware costs increasing linearly with production capacity. In contrast, this embodiment adopts a dynamic association allocation and time-sharing multiplexing parallel scheduling architecture, which significantly reduces the average testing time of a single Bluetooth device under test from the traditional 1-2 minutes to approximately 5 seconds, improving overall testing efficiency by tens of times. The microscopic mechanism behind this non-linear efficiency leap lies in the fact that the parallel scheduling mechanism breaks down the originally serial long-cycle task into multiple short-cycle tasks that can be executed synchronously, so that the system throughput no longer decreases linearly with the number of devices, but maintains stable concurrent processing capabilities through the multiplexing mechanism.

[0091] The above description is merely a specific embodiment of the present invention, but the scope of protection of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any variations or substitutions that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art within the technical scope disclosed in the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention. For example, without departing from the core concept of the present invention, replacing the time-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism with a frequency-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism, replacing the Bluetooth communication protocol with other wireless communication protocols such as Wi-Fi or Zigbee, replacing the multi-channel serial port expansion unit with a multi-channel USB expander or an Ethernet switch, or adjusting the gradient sequence and form of the interference signal, etc., are all variations and substitutions that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art. Therefore, the scope of protection of the present invention should be determined by the scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A method for scheduling parallel tests of wireless devices, including: Obtain the identifiers of multiple wireless nodes to be tested; The identifiers of the multiple wireless nodes under test are dynamically associated and assigned to the corresponding multiple test agent nodes, so as to coordinate the multiple test agent nodes and the multiple wireless nodes under test to perform bidirectional data loopback verification in parallel.

2. The wireless device parallel test scheduling method of claim 1, wherein, The step of dynamically associating and assigning the identifiers of the plurality of wireless nodes under test to the corresponding plurality of test proxy nodes includes: The test agent node is assigned based on either the identifier of the wireless node under test or the load status of the test agent node.

3. The wireless device parallel test scheduling method of claim 1, wherein, The multiplexing scheduling mechanism allocates independent communication resources to each wireless node under test to achieve the parallel execution of bidirectional data loopback verification; the multiplexing scheduling mechanism is a time-division multiplexing scheduling mechanism, which allocates an independent time slot to each wireless node under test to perform the bidirectional data loopback verification within the independent time slot.

4. The wireless device parallel test scheduling method of claim 1, wherein, After obtaining the identifiers of multiple wireless nodes under test and before the dynamic association and allocation, the multiple wireless nodes under test are verified by a trusted verification module; only the identifiers of wireless nodes under test that have passed the trusted verification are dynamically associated and allocated to the corresponding test agent nodes.

5. The wireless device parallel test scheduling method of claim 4, wherein, The trusted verification of the multiple wireless nodes under test via the trusted verification module includes: authenticating the identity of the wireless nodes under test to verify the legitimacy of their identity identifiers; performing firmware integrity verification on the wireless nodes under test to verify whether the integrity metric of their firmware image is consistent with the pre-stored baseline value; the test data in the bidirectional data loopback verification is encrypted by the trusted verification module and then sent out, and after the wireless nodes under test send back the encrypted data, the trusted verification module decrypts it and verifies the trusted verification value; the method also outputs trusted security test results, which include identity authentication results, firmware integrity verification results, and trusted verification value verification results.

6. The wireless device parallel test scheduling method of claim 1, wherein, The coordination of the multiple test agent nodes and the multiple wireless nodes under test to perform bidirectional data loopback verification in parallel includes: The test control node sends test data to the test agent node, which then transmits it to the wireless node under test. The wireless node under test transmits the received test data back to the test control node via the test agent node; The test control node verifies whether the returned data is consistent with the original test data.

7. The wireless device parallel test scheduling method of claim 1, wherein, During the bidirectional data loopback verification process, the test control node controls an external interference source to emit an interference signal of controllable strength in the current communication channel; and records the data transmission stability index of the wireless node under test under interference conditions.

8. A parallel test scheduling system for wireless devices, comprising a test control node, multiple test proxy nodes, and multiple wireless nodes under test; The test control node is configured to acquire the identifiers of the plurality of wireless nodes under test and dynamically associate and assign the identifiers to the corresponding plurality of test agent nodes, so as to coordinate the plurality of test agent nodes and the plurality of wireless nodes under test to perform bidirectional data loopback verification in parallel.

9. The wireless device parallel test scheduling system of claim 8, wherein, It also includes a multi-channel serial port expansion unit; the test control node connects to the multiple wireless nodes under test through the multi-channel serial port expansion unit.

10. The wireless device parallel test scheduling system of claim 8, wherein, It also includes a trusted verification module; the test control node performs trusted verification on the multiple wireless nodes under test through the trusted verification module, and dynamically associates and assigns the identifiers of the wireless nodes under test that have passed the trusted verification to the corresponding test agent nodes.

Images