Embedded that ships like software. Tested on real silicon, every commit.

Q: What is hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) testing?

Hardware-in-the-loop testing runs firmware on real target hardware while the surrounding environment - signals, conditions, peer devices - is simulated or controlled, so firmware-hardware interactions can be tested automatically in realistic scenarios. It's the layer that catches the bugs living at the firmware-hardware boundary, which pure software tests can't see. needCode designs and builds HIL frameworks that run on every commit, turning manual bench sessions into repeatable automation.

Q: Can embedded firmware really use CI/CD like normal software?

Yes - the difference is that the pipeline must be rebuilt around firmware's realities: flashing real boards as a pipeline stage, hardware farms instead of cloud runners, reproducible Docker or dev-container builds, and binary artefact provenance. Once that's in place, firmware ships the way software does - per commit, through automated gates, with releases as routine rather than events. needCode builds these pipelines as a service, using the same methodology behind its own delivery.

Q: How do you automate RF and wireless protocol testing?

Wireless behaviour is verified under controlled RF conditions - link performance, protocol correctness, and coexistence for BLE, UWB, Zigbee, Matter, and WiFi - with pass/fail rules executing against live radio traffic and captures archived as evidence. For UWB, needCode's own protocol sniffer plugs into the bench through a REST API, giving the pipeline an instrument no silicon vendor offers. RF regressions are invisible to unit tests; this is the layer that makes them visible.

Q: How long does Bluetooth PTS qualification take?

Run manually, a full Bluetooth PTS campaign typically consumes weeks of engineer time clicking through test cases; automated, needCode runs it as an overnight job. That compression moves qualification off the critical path and lets pre-certification testing run continuously during development instead of once at the end. The certification outcome itself - BT SIG, FiRa, CCC - is handled by needCode's Standards & Certification service, which this automation feeds.

Q: How do you deal with flaky tests on real hardware?

Flakiness is engineered out, not tolerated: deterministic test design, controlled RF environments, instrumented retries that distinguish environmental noise from real failures, and quarantine mechanisms so an unstable test can't erode trust in the pipeline. A hardware test suite is only useful if a red build means a real bug. This is the hardest part of HIL work - and the reason generic CI consultants struggle with embedded.

Q: Does test automation replace manual testing entirely?

No - automation takes over the repetitive, regression-prone, per-commit work, which frees human testing for what it's actually good at: exploratory testing, usability, and the judgment calls no script makes. The goal is that no human ever re-verifies yesterday's behaviour by hand. In practice, teams end up doing more meaningful manual testing, not less, because the routine burden is gone.

Q: Can you integrate with our existing CI system and test benches?

Yes - needCode builds on what exists: pipelines integrate with common CI platforms, HIL stands incorporate your current instruments and boards, and results flow into your reporting in schema-stable formats. Where a capability is missing - evidence-grade UWB capture, controlled RF, board farms - we add it. An audit engagement maps the current state first, so the roadmap extends your investment instead of replacing it.

Q: How does test automation connect to certification?

Directly: products that arrive at certification pre-tested pass instead of iterating, because pre-certification suites have been running continuously against the spec throughout development. This page's automation is the infrastructure; the certification outcome - Bluetooth SIG, FiRa, CCC conformity - is owned by needCode's Standards & Certification service. Together they turn the certification date from a risk into a checkpoint.

Q: What does a per-commit hardware test farm look like?

A rack (or lab) of target boards - ideally every hardware variant you support - wired for automated flashing, power control, and instrumentation, exposed to the CI system as a pipeline stage. Every commit builds reproducibly, flashes the farm, runs the suites, and gates the merge on real-silicon results. needCode designs the farm around your actual board matrix and scales it as the matrix grows.

Q: Can needCode build our test and release infrastructure end to end?

Yes - from an audit of the current build/test/release path, through HIL frameworks and hardware farms, RF and protocol automation with capture evidence, to CI/CD pipelines and qualification automation, with documentation and handover or a standing embedded quality team. The methodology is the one needCode runs internally under ISO 9001, forged in an 8-year silicon-scale Qorvo programme. One team owns the infrastructure and the discipline.

Software teams solved slow feedback decades ago - embedded teams still pay for it in manual bench sessions, release candidates tested by hand, and regressions found by customers. needCode builds the infrastructure that closes that gap: hardware-in-the-loop test stands running firmware on real silicon, automated RF and protocol testing with evidence-grade capture, and CI/CD pipelines built for firmware. Regressions caught per commit, not per release. From an EU-based, ISO 9001-certified Qorvo partner.

Book a discovery call

What we build

We work with Industry Leaders

The most expensive bug is the one that waits for a human to find it

In embedded, the feedback loop is where quality is decided. When testing means an engineer at a bench, feedback comes in days - so bugs are found late, when they're expensive; RF regressions slip through invisibly, because no unit test sees a degraded link budget; and releases become events that teams brace for instead of routine outputs of a pipeline. The standard excuse is that hardware can't be automated. It can - firmware running on real silicon, exercised automatically on every commit, with radio traffic captured as evidence - and the teams that build this infrastructure ship faster and safer, because those stopped being a trade-off.

needCode builds it as a discipline, not a bolt-on: hardware-in-the-loop environments where real hardware meets simulated conditions, wireless protocols verified under controlled RF propagation, and pipelines that treat firmware like the software it is. It's the methodology behind our own delivery - DevOps for engineering, under ISO 9001 - offered as a service.

Real silicon, not simulators

Automated test stands run your firmware on target hardware - because the bugs that matter live in the firmware-hardware boundary.

RF regressions, made visible

Protocol and radio behaviour tested under controlled conditions, with capture as evidence - including our own UWB protocol sniffer in the loop.

Per commit, not per release

CI/CD pipelines built for firmware - reproducible builds, automated gates, releases as routine.

What we build

Four layers of test infrastructure, each one turning a manual bottleneck into an automated gate.

Hardware-in-the-Loop Frameworks

Automated test stands where firmware runs on real silicon against simulated and controlled physical conditions - exercised on every commit, not when a bench engineer has time. The hard part isn't the rack; it's engineering flakiness out of tests that involve real radios, real timing, and real environmental noise, so a red build means a real bug.

Platform Bring-Up & SDK

RF & Protocol Test Automation

Automated verification of wireless behaviour - BLE, UWB, Zigbee, Matter, WiFi - under controlled RF propagation, with pass/fail rules running on live radio traffic and captures stored as evidence. Our own UWB Protocol Sniffer plugs into the bench through its REST API, giving pipelines an instrument the silicon vendors don't offer.

Multi-Protocol / Coexistence

UWB Sniffer

CI/CD Pipelines for Embedded

Build, test, and release pipelines adapted to firmware's realities - reproducible Docker and dev-container builds, hardware farms as pipeline stages, artefact management, and release automation that makes shipping boring. Generic DevOps tooling assumes the deploy target is a server; firmware needs the pipeline rebuilt around flashing, fleets of boards, and binary provenance.

OTA Update Systems

Regression & Qualification Automation

Automated regression suites that keep yesterday's fixes fixed, plus qualification automation that compresses formal test campaigns - Bluetooth PTS runs that took weeks of manual clicking become an overnight job. This is the layer that de-risks the certification date; the certification outcome itself is owned by our Standards & Certification service.

Standards & Certification

Still testing releases by hand?

Book a discovery call with our CEO

Book a discovery call

Where this infrastructure pays off

Test automation isn't a project - it's the floor under every programme that has to ship repeatedly. Four places it earns its cost fastest.

SDK & Platform Programmes

An SDK is judged by whether the next release breaks the customer - so every commit needs the full battery on real hardware, across every supported board. This is the discipline behind long-running platform work at silicon scale.

UWB SDK Development

BLE SDK Development

Certification on the Critical Path

Products that arrive at certification pre-tested pass instead of iterating - pre-certification suites run continuously, so the formal campaign confirms rather than discovers. The fastest certification is the one with no surprises in it.

Standards & Certification

Automotive & Digital Key HIL

Digital key and secure-ranging programmes demand HIL benches that speak CAN, exercise multi-anchor UWB sessions, and prove ranging behaviour release after release - with the sniffer capturing the radio truth on every run.

Automotive & SDV

Digital Keys & Access

RTLS & Positioning Validation

Positioning systems regress quietly - an anchor firmware update shifts accuracy and nobody notices until operations do. Automated accuracy and behaviour testing catches the drift while it's still a diff, not an incident.

Indoor Positioning (RTLS)

UWB RTLS Design & Deployment

Why teams bring us their testing

Forged at silicon scale

Our test culture comes from an 8-year Qorvo R&D partnership across 9 hardware-platform bring-ups - the environment where an SDK release faces every supported board, automatically, before it ships. We're not selling a theory; we're packaging how we already work.

We build our own instruments

When no vendor sells the tool, we build it - the UWB Protocol Sniffer exists because our own benches needed evidence-grade radio capture, and its REST/CI-CD interface was designed for exactly the pipelines this page describes.

Qualification, compressed

We automated Bluetooth PTS qualification from weeks of manual work to an overnight run - the kind of compression that moves a certification from the critical path to a checkbox.

Discipline you can audit

ISO 9001-certified processes and a DevOps-for-engineering methodology - reproducible builds, traceable results, documentation as a product - the posture a regulated or safety-conscious buyer expects to find behind a test report.

Four ways to bring needCode in

From an audit of what you have to a standing quality team. We match the engagement to where your delivery hurts.

01 Test Infrastructure Audit & Roadmap

Duration:
2-4 weeks
Best for:
Teams that know feedback is too slow but need a concrete plan - what to automate first, what it costs, what it returns
Deliverable:
Audit of the current build/test/release path, prioritised automation roadmap, HIL architecture proposal, leadership readout

02 HIL & Pipeline Build

Duration:
Phased
Best for:
Building the core infrastructure - HIL stands, hardware farm, CI/CD pipeline, reproducible builds - around your product and boards
Deliverable:
A working per-commit pipeline running firmware on real hardware, with documentation and handover

03 RF, Regression & Qualification Automation

Duration:
Phased
Best for:
Extending the pipeline upward - automated RF verification with capture evidence, regression suites, PTS and pre-certification automation
Deliverable:
Automated protocol test suites, sniffer-backed RF gates, qualification runs compressed to overnight jobs

04 Embedded Quality Team

Duration:
Multi-year, retainer-based
Best for:
Programmes that want testing owned continuously, inside their cadence, as the product and board matrix grow
Deliverable:
An embedded team in your cadence - the model behind the 30-FTE Qorvo programme

What we ship on

We build on your stack where it exists and bring our own instruments where it doesn't.

HIL & instruments

Custom HIL rigs

UWB Protocol Sniffer (in-house)

controlled RF environments

target-board farms

power & environmental instrumentation

Protocols under test

UWB

BLE

Zigbee

Matter

WiFi

multi-protocol coexistence

Pipelines

GitLab CI

GitHub Actions

Jenkins

Docker / dev-container reproducible builds

Test layers

protocol & RF

firmware-hardware interaction (HIL)

system performance, scalability, reliability

environmental (temperature, vibration, interference)

Unit & integration (embedded components)

Qualification

Automated Bluetooth PTS

pre-certification suites

FiRa / CCC test readiness

Reporting

Schema-stable JSON

dashboards

pass/fail gates

capture archives as evidence

Case studies

needCode doesn't publish a standalone test-automation case study. What we can show is where the discipline comes from - and the instrument it produced.

Qorvo: RF Leadership

Context: Rapid scaling for new chipset bring-up.

Scale: Grew from <10 to 30 FTEs.
Output: Supported bring-up of 9 new hardware platforms (SDKs, Drivers, Stacks).
Retention: Zero-churn core team retained for 5+ years.

Dedicated Development Center for RF Solutions

Bluetooth Mesh Smart Lighting Control System

Smart Lighting: Core R&D Extension

Context: Client needed deep, specialized expertise to pivot from proprietary tech to a new global standard.

Service: Deployed a dedicated squad of embedded engineers to function as the client's core R&D team.
Output: Co-authored official Bluetooth SIG protocols and delivered the world’s first certified BLE Mesh stack.
Value: Enabled the client to secure Series A funding and defined the industry standard for smart buildings.

Creative Werks: Innovation rescue

Context: Hardware obsolescence threatened production shutdown.

Action: Full-stack takeover (PCB redesign + Firmware + Mobile App).
ROI: 1230% ($1.6M value generated).
Speed: Payback period of 2-3 months.

NeedCode-case study - IoT Solution for Boat Lift Modernization - cover2s

PowerPollen: AgTech automation

Context: Lack of internal expertise stalled a critical automation project.

Action: Re-architected system using unified MCU and ISOBUS standards.
ROI: 13.8x ($2.9M value generated).
Impact: Enabled $1.9M increase in harvester value.

Strategic Partnership

needCode is an official business partner of Qorvo, bringing over 8 years of proven expertise and trusted service to the technology sector.

Check our performance

Members of the UWB Alliance

In 2025 we became a member of the UWB Alliance. This strategic step reinforces our commitment to pioneering Ultra-Wideband (UWB) technology.

Nordic Semiconductor

needCode was approved in both – listed as a Design Partner in EMEA, and as a Solution Partner in the Bluetooth Positioning Systems category.

Read about partnership

Proudly Certified for Excellence and Security

needCode is officially certified for:
ISO 9001:2015 – Quality Management
ISO/IEC 27001:2022 – Information Security

ISO certifications reflect our focus on delivering reliable IoT solutions, smart product development, and secure technology services.

Testimonials

“I think the key takeaway from needCode is their ability to adapt and understand the customer's requirements. That took away probably a large portion of what could have been a lot of development time and expense for both companies.”

Bob Folkestad

President at Creative Werks

“One aspect that truly sets needCode apart is its profound expertise in firmware development. Their proficiency in various programming languages, embedded systems and hardware architecture is truly impressive. When faced with difficult problems, their strong problem-solving skills and analytical mindset shine through, allowing them to overcome obstacles with remarkable ease.”

Semeh Sarhan

CEO at Xtrava

“I worked with needCode while leading the NWTN-Berlin team in 2018. A big chunk for our FW development has been outsourced to them and they had proven to iterate very quickly, following specs and deliver on time. It was great working with them. I recommend working with needCode’s team on any Embedded SW development.”

Marco Salvioli Mariani

CTO at NWTN Berlin GmbH

“needCode Team proved to be one of the best engineers I have ever met. The part I like the most about the team is the more difficult an obstacle seems to be, the more motivated they were to find a solution and a way forward.”

Szymon Słupik

CTO at Silvair

“needCode is an outstanding partner. Their quick follow-up, scalability, and extensive professional network set them apart. Their expertise in wireless technologies has been valuable, supporting us from low-level drivers to architecture discussions.”

Tim Allemeersch

Director at Qorvo, Inc.

“needCode did a great job improving the firmware of the Vai Kai connected toys and developing new features, surpassing our expectations multiple times. I would definitely recommend hiring Bartek and needCode for the embedded software projects!”

Matas Petrikas

CEO & Co-founder at Vai Kai UG

Insights

Automating Bluetooth Qualification: From Weeks of PTS to an Overnight Job

There is a particular ritual in Bluetooth product development that anyone who has been through it remembers vividly. It is the manual qualification regression: sitting in front of a Windows machine running the Profile Tuning Suite, clicking through hundreds of test cases over the course of a week or two, interpreting results that range from […]

Documentation as a product: how good SDKs treat docs as code

The deliverable customers interact with most often is the one most commonly treated as a secondary artifact. Six document types, six audiences, and one release gate that fixes most of the failure modes. A semiconductor SDK can have an exemplary architecture, a thoughtfully versioned C API, a security framework that maps cleanly to PSA Certified […]

FAQ