互斥量和二进制信号量是相同的用法，但实际上，它们是不同的。

对于互斥锁，只有锁定了它的线程才能解锁它。如果有其他线程来锁定它，它将等待。

对于信号电话来说，情况就不是这样了。信号量没有与特定的线程ID绑定。

互斥锁:假设我们有临界区线程T1想要访问它，然后按照以下步骤进行。 T1:

锁 使用临界区 解锁

二进制信号量:它基于信号等待和信号工作。 等待将“s”的值减少1，通常“s”的值初始化为值“1”， 信号(s)使“s”值加1。如果“s”值为1表示没有人在使用临界区，当“s”值为0时表示临界区正在使用。 假设线程T2正在使用临界区，那么它遵循以下步骤。 T2:

Wait (s)//最初的s值是1，调用Wait后，它的值减少了1，即0 利用临界区 信号(s) //现在s值增加，变成1

Main difference between Mutex and Binary semaphore is in Mutext if thread lock the critical section then it has to unlock critical section no other thread can unlock it, but in case of Binary semaphore if one thread locks critical section using wait(s) function then value of s become "0" and no one can access it until value of "s" become 1 but suppose some other thread calls signal(s) then value of "s" become 1 and it allows other function to use critical section. hence in Binary semaphore thread doesn't have ownership.

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。

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”。

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/