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.

互斥锁

Until recently, the only sleeping lock in the kernel was the semaphore. Most users of semaphores instantiated a semaphore with a count of one and treated them as a mutual exclusion lock—a sleeping version of the spin-lock. Unfortunately, semaphores are rather generic and do not impose any usage constraints. This makes them useful for managing exclusive access in obscure situations, such as complicated dances between the kernel and userspace. But it also means that simpler locking is harder to do, and the lack of enforced rules makes any sort of automated debugging or constraint enforcement impossible. Seeking a simpler sleeping lock, the kernel developers introduced the mutex.Yes, as you are now accustomed to, that is a confusing name. Let’s clarify.The term “mutex” is a generic name to refer to any sleeping lock that enforces mutual exclusion, such as a semaphore with a usage count of one. In recent Linux kernels, the proper noun “mutex” is now also a specific type of sleeping lock that implements mutual exclusion.That is, a mutex is a mutex.

互斥锁的简单性和效率来自于它在信号量要求之外强加给用户的附加约束。信号量是按照Dijkstra的原始设计来实现最基本的行为，而互斥锁则不同，它的用例更严格、更窄: n一次只能有一个任务持有互斥锁。也就是说，互斥锁的使用计数总是1。

Whoever locked a mutex must unlock it. That is, you cannot lock a mutex in one context and then unlock it in another. This means that the mutex isn’t suitable for more complicated synchronizations between kernel and user-space. Most use cases, however, cleanly lock and unlock from the same context. Recursive locks and unlocks are not allowed. That is, you cannot recursively acquire the same mutex, and you cannot unlock an unlocked mutex. A process cannot exit while holding a mutex. A mutex cannot be acquired by an interrupt handler or bottom half, even with mutex_trylock(). A mutex can be managed only via the official API: It must be initialized via the methods described in this section and cannot be copied, hand initialized, or reinitialized.

[1] Linux内核开发，第三版Robert Love

互斥量是任何想要解决临界区问题的算法都必须遵循的标准，而二进制信号量本身是一个可以取0和1值的变量。

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。

关于这个主题的好文章:

互斥量与信号量——第1部分:信号量 互斥量与信号量——第2部分:互斥量 互斥量与信号量——第3部分(最后一部分):互斥问题

来自第二部分:

The mutex is similar to the principles of the binary semaphore with one significant difference: the principle of ownership. Ownership is the simple concept that when a task locks (acquires) a mutex only it can unlock (release) it. If a task tries to unlock a mutex it hasn’t locked (thus doesn’t own) then an error condition is encountered and, most importantly, the mutex is not unlocked. If the mutual exclusion object doesn't have ownership then, irrelevant of what it is called, it is not a mutex.

它们的同步语义非常不同:

互斥对象允许对给定资源的序列化访问，即多个线程等待一个锁，一次一个，正如前面所说，线程拥有锁，直到锁完成:只有这个特定的线程可以解锁它。 二进制信号量是一个值为0和1的计数器:任务阻塞在它上，直到任何任务执行sem_post。信号量宣布资源可用，并提供等待机制，直到发出可用信号。

因此，可以将互斥锁视为在任务之间传递的令牌，将信号量视为交通红灯(它向某人发出信号，表示可以继续进行)。