I think most of the answers here were confusing especially those saying that mutex can be released only by the process that holds it but semaphore can be signaled by ay process. The above line is kind of vague in terms of semaphore. To understand we should know that there are two kinds of semaphore one is called counting semaphore and the other is called a binary semaphore. In counting semaphore handles access to n number of resources where n can be defined before the use. Each semaphore has a count variable, which keeps the count of the number of resources in use, initially, it is set to n. Each process that wishes to uses a resource performs a wait() operation on the semaphore (thereby decrementing the count). When a process releases a resource, it performs a release() operation (incrementing the count). When the count becomes 0, all the resources are being used. After that, the process waits until the count becomes more than 0. Now here is the catch only the process that holds the resource can increase the count no other process can increase the count only the processes holding a resource can increase the count and the process waiting for the semaphore again checks and when it sees the resource available it decreases the count again. So in terms of binary semaphore, only the process holding the semaphore can increase the count, and count remains zero until it stops using the semaphore and increases the count and other process gets the chance to access the semaphore.

二进制信号量和互斥量之间的主要区别在于，信号量是一种信号机制，而互斥量是一种锁定机制，但二进制信号量的功能似乎与互斥量类似，这造成了混乱，但两者是适用于不同类型工作的不同概念。

互斥锁只能由获得它的线程释放。 二进制信号量可以由任何线程(或进程)发出信号。

因此，信号量更适合于一些同步问题，如生产者-消费者。

在Windows上，二进制信号量更像事件对象而不是互斥对象。

互斥锁控制对单个共享资源的访问。它提供了获取()对资源的访问并在完成后释放()资源的操作。

信号量控制对共享资源池的访问。它提供Wait()操作，直到池中的一个资源可用，并提供Signal()操作，当它返回池时。

当一个信号量保护的资源数量大于1时，它被称为计数信号量。当它控制一个资源时，它被称为布尔信号量。布尔信号量相当于互斥量。

因此，信号量是比互斥量更高级别的抽象。互斥锁可以用信号量来实现，但不能用信号量来实现。

修改问题是-互斥量和“二进制”信号量在“Linux”中的区别是什么?

答:以下是它们的区别 i)作用域——互斥锁的作用域在创建它的进程地址空间内，用于线程同步。而信号量可以跨进程空间使用，因此它可以用于进程间同步。

ii)互斥量是轻量级的，比信号量更快。Futex甚至更快。

iii)同一线程可以成功多次获得互斥锁，条件是互斥锁释放次数相同。其他线程试图获取将阻塞。而对于信号量，如果同一个进程试图再次获取它，它会阻塞，因为它只能获得一次。

厕所的例子是一个有趣的类比:

Mutex: Is a key to a toilet. One person can have the key - occupy the toilet - at the time. When finished, the person gives (frees) the key to the next person in the queue. Officially: "Mutexes are typically used to serialise access to a section of re-entrant code that cannot be executed concurrently by more than one thread. A mutex object only allows one thread into a controlled section, forcing other threads which attempt to gain access to that section to wait until the first thread has exited from that section." Ref: Symbian Developer Library (A mutex is really a semaphore with value 1.) Semaphore: Is the number of free identical toilet keys. Example, say we have four toilets with identical locks and keys. The semaphore count - the count of keys - is set to 4 at beginning (all four toilets are free), then the count value is decremented as people are coming in. If all toilets are full, ie. there are no free keys left, the semaphore count is 0. Now, when eq. one person leaves the toilet, semaphore is increased to 1 (one free key), and given to the next person in the queue. Officially: "A semaphore restricts the number of simultaneous users of a shared resource up to a maximum number. Threads can request access to the resource (decrementing the semaphore), and can signal that they have finished using the resource (incrementing the semaphore)." Ref: Symbian Developer Library

Mutex is used to protect the sensitive code and data, semaphore is used to synchronization.You also can have practical use with protect the sensitive code, but there might be a risk that release the protection by the other thread by operation V.So The main difference between bi-semaphore and mutex is the ownership.For instance by toilet , Mutex is like that one can enter the toilet and lock the door, no one else can enter until the man get out, bi-semaphore is like that one can enter the toilet and lock the door, but someone else could enter by asking the administrator to open the door, it's ridiculous.