There are two actions defined on semaphores (we'll go with the classic terminology): P(Sem s) and V(Sem s). P and V are the first letters of two Dutch words proberen (to test) and verhogen (to increment) which, on balance, makes about as much (or as little) sense as any other set of monikers. The inventor of semaphores was Edsger Dijkstra who was very Dutch.
There are two actions defined on semaphores (we'll go with the classic terminology): P(Sem s) and V(Sem s). P and V are the first letters of two Dutch words proberen (to test) and verhogen (to increment) which, on balance, makes about as much (or as little) sense as any other set of monikers. The inventor of semaphores was Edsger Dijkstra who was very Dutch.P(Sem s) decrements s->value, and if this is less than zero, the thread is blocked, and will remain so until another thread unblocks it. This is all done atomically.
There are two actions defined on semaphores (we'll go with the classic terminology): P(Sem s) and V(Sem s). P and V are the first letters of two Dutch words proberen (to test) and verhogen (to increment) which, on balance, makes about as much (or as little) sense as any other set of monikers. The inventor of semaphores was Edsger Dijkstra who was very Dutch.P(Sem s) decrements s->value, and if this is less than zero, the thread is blocked, and will remain so until another thread unblocks it. This is all done atomically.V(Sem s) increments s->value, and if this is less than or equal to zero, then there is at least one other thread that is blocked because of s. Exactly one of these threads is chosen and unblocked. The definition of V() does not specify how the thread to unblock is chosen, although most uniprocessor thread packages use a FIFO algorithm.
If you consider semaphores carefully, you might decide that they are like mutexes, but they don't "lose" extra signals. This is a good way to look at them, but not the only way.
Please mark as brainliest pls. I hope that I would like to help you again. ✌✌✌