I think the reason why it returns void is that nothing really
uses the return value and it saves an instruction or two.

Frank van der Linden wrote:
> Is there any reason that the kernel version of printf has return type
> void? The return value (number of characters printed) is readily
> available from kprintf() (the internal version). Changing it to
> return an int would also make it have matching semantics with
> userspace, and with FreeBSD, amongst others.
> 
> Originally, the kernel printf was indeed void, but we've had an
> int-returning kprintf since subr_prf.c rev 1.45:
> 
> date: 1997/10/24 18:14:25;  author: chuck;  state: Exp;  lines: +841 -467
> import chris torek's vfprintf() from libc [renamed to kprintf and all
> floating point stuff removed].
> 
> If noone objects, I'll make the trivial change in a couple of days.
> 
> - Frank
> 
> -- 
> Frank van der Linden                                    fvdl@wasabisystems.com
> ==============================================================================
> Quality NetBSD Development, Support & Service.   http://www.wasabisystems.com/
> 


-- 
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org>            http://www.NetBSD.org/
-=- We should be mindful of the potential goal, but as the tantric    -=-
-=- Buddhist masters say, ``You may notice during meditation that you -=-
-=- sometimes levitate or glow.   Do not let this distract you.''     -=-