You obviously use mutex to lock a data in one thread getting accessed by another thread at the same time. Assume that you have just called lock() and in the process of accessing data. This means that you don’t expect any other thread (or another instance of the same thread-code) to access the same data locked by the same mutex. That is, if it is the same thread-code getting executed on a different thread instance, hits the lock, then the lock() should block the control flow there. This applies to a thread that uses a different thread-code, which is also accessing the same data and which is also locked by the same mutex. In this case, you are still in the process of accessing the data and you may take, say, another 15 secs to reach the mutex unlock (so that the other thread that is getting blocked in mutex lock would unblock and would allow the control to access the data). Do you at any cost allow yet another thread to just unlock the same mutex, and in turn, allow the thread that is already waiting (blocking) in the mutex lock to unblock and access the data? Hope you got what I am saying here? As per, agreed upon universal definition!,

使用“互斥”就不会发生这种情况。没有其他线程可以解锁锁 在你的帖子里 使用“二进制信号量”可以实现这种情况。任何其他线程都可以解锁 线程中的锁

因此，如果您非常注重使用二进制信号量而不是互斥量，那么在锁定和解锁的“作用域”时应该非常小心。我的意思是，每个触及每个锁的控制流都应该触及一个解锁调用，也不应该有任何“第一次解锁”，而应该总是“第一次锁定”。

在Windows上，互斥量和二进制信号量之间有两个区别:

互斥锁只能由拥有所有权的线程释放，即之前调用Wait函数的线程(或在创建互斥锁时获得所有权的线程)。任何线程都可以释放信号量。 线程可以在互斥锁上重复调用等待函数而不会阻塞。但是，如果你在一个二进制信号量上调用了两次等待函数，而中间没有释放信号量，线程就会阻塞。

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.

既然上面的答案都不能消除困惑，这里有一个答案可以消除我的困惑。

Strictly speaking, a mutex is a locking mechanism used to synchronize access to a resource. Only one task (can be a thread or process based on OS abstraction) can acquire the mutex. It means there will be ownership associated with mutex, and only the owner can release the lock (mutex). Semaphore is signaling mechanism (“I am done, you can carry on” kind of signal). For example, if you are listening songs (assume it as one task) on your mobile and at the same time your friend called you, an interrupt will be triggered upon which an interrupt service routine (ISR) will signal the call processing task to wakeup.

来源:http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/mutex-vs-semaphore/

互斥对象有所有权，不像信号量。尽管在互斥量范围内的任何线程都可以获得一个未锁定的互斥量，并锁定对同一关键代码段的访问，但只有锁定了互斥量的线程才应该解锁它。

互斥锁用于“锁定机制”。每次只有一个进程可以使用共享资源

而

信号量用于“信号机制” 比如“我完成了，现在可以继续了”