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。

在窗口，差异如下所示。 MUTEX:成功执行等待的进程必须执行一个信号，反之亦然。二进制信号量:不同的进程可以在一个信号量上执行等待或信号操作。

在理论层面上，它们在语义上并无不同。您可以使用信号量实现互斥量，反之亦然(参见这里的示例)。在实践中，实现是不同的，它们提供的服务也略有不同。

实际的区别(就围绕它们的系统服务而言)在于互斥锁的实现旨在成为一种更轻量级的同步机制。在oracle语言中，互斥锁被称为锁存器，而信号量被称为等待。

在最低级别，他们使用某种原子测试和设置机制。它读取内存位置的当前值，计算某种条件，并在一条不能中断的指令中写入该位置的值。这意味着您可以获得一个互斥锁，并测试是否有人在您之前拥有它。

典型的互斥量实现有一个进程或线程执行test-and-set指令，并评估是否有其他东西设置了互斥量。这里的关键点是与调度程序没有交互，因此我们不知道(也不关心)谁设置了锁。然后，我们要么放弃我们的时间片，并在任务重新调度时再次尝试它，要么执行自旋锁。自旋锁是这样一种算法:

Count down from 5000:
     i. Execute the test-and-set instruction
    ii. If the mutex is clear, we have acquired it in the previous instruction 
        so we can exit the loop
   iii. When we get to zero, give up our time slice.

当我们完成执行受保护的代码(称为临界区)时，我们只需将互斥量的值设置为零或其他表示“清除”的值。如果有多个任务试图获取互斥量，那么下一个计划在互斥量释放后的任务将获得对资源的访问权。通常情况下，您可以使用互斥来控制同步资源，在这种资源中，只需要在很短的时间内对其进行独占访问，通常是对共享数据结构进行更新。

A semaphore is a synchronised data structure (typically using a mutex) that has a count and some system call wrappers that interact with the scheduler in a bit more depth than the mutex libraries would. Semaphores are incremented and decremented and used to block tasks until something else is ready. See Producer/Consumer Problem for a simple example of this. Semaphores are initialised to some value - a binary semaphore is just a special case where the semaphore is initialised to 1. Posting to a semaphore has the effect of waking up a waiting process.

一个基本的信号量算法如下所示:

(somewhere in the program startup)
Initialise the semaphore to its start-up value.

Acquiring a semaphore
   i. (synchronised) Attempt to decrement the semaphore value
  ii. If the value would be less than zero, put the task on the tail of the list of tasks waiting on the semaphore and give up the time slice.

Posting a semaphore
   i. (synchronised) Increment the semaphore value
  ii. If the value is greater or equal to the amount requested in the post at the front of the queue, take that task off the queue and make it runnable.  
 iii. Repeat (ii) for all tasks until the posted value is exhausted or there are no more tasks waiting.

在二进制信号量的情况下，两者之间的主要实际区别是围绕实际数据结构的系统服务的性质。

编辑:正如evan正确地指出的那样，自旋锁会降低单个处理器的速度。你只能在多处理器上使用自旋锁，因为在单处理器上，持有互斥锁的进程永远不会在另一个任务运行时重置它。自旋锁只在多处理器架构上有用。

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。

你可以通过以下方法清楚地记住不同之处:

互斥锁:用于保护关键区域， 互斥锁不能跨进程使用，只能在单个进程中使用 信号量:用于信号资源的可用性。 信号量既可以跨进程使用，也可以跨进程使用。

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。