diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
index 8dad74432677..2614892ca063 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
@@ -43,6 +43,12 @@ enum bpf_reg_liveness {
 	REG_LIVE_DONE = 0x8, /* liveness won't be updating this register anymore */
 };
 
+enum bpf_reg_precise {
+	NOT_PRECISE,
+	PRECISE,
+	EXACT,
+};
+
 struct bpf_reg_state {
 	/* Ordering of fields matters.  See states_equal() */
 	enum bpf_reg_type type;
@@ -180,7 +186,7 @@ struct bpf_reg_state {
 	s32 subreg_def;
 	enum bpf_reg_liveness live;
 	/* if (!precise && SCALAR_VALUE) min/max/tnum don't affect safety */
-	bool precise;
+	enum bpf_reg_precise precise;
 };
 
 enum bpf_stack_slot_type {
@@ -624,8 +630,6 @@ int bpf_check_attach_target(struct bpf_verifier_log *log,
 			    struct bpf_attach_target_info *tgt_info);
 void bpf_free_kfunc_btf_tab(struct bpf_kfunc_btf_tab *tab);
 
-int mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno);
-
 #define BPF_BASE_TYPE_MASK	GENMASK(BPF_BASE_TYPE_BITS - 1, 0)
 
 /* extract base type from bpf_{arg, return, reg}_type. */
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index b22ad48bbecd..abb2df954f3f 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -855,7 +855,7 @@ static void print_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		print_liveness(env, reg->live);
 		verbose(env, "=");
 		if (t == SCALAR_VALUE && reg->precise)
-			verbose(env, "P");
+			verbose(env, reg->precise == EXACT ? "E" : "P");
 		if ((t == SCALAR_VALUE || t == PTR_TO_STACK) &&
 		    tnum_is_const(reg->var_off)) {
 			/* reg->off should be 0 for SCALAR_VALUE */
@@ -952,7 +952,7 @@ static void print_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 			t = reg->type;
 			verbose(env, "=%s", t == SCALAR_VALUE ? "" : reg_type_str(env, t));
 			if (t == SCALAR_VALUE && reg->precise)
-				verbose(env, "P");
+				verbose(env, reg->precise == EXACT ? "E" : "P");
 			if (t == SCALAR_VALUE && tnum_is_const(reg->var_off))
 				verbose(env, "%lld", reg->var_off.value + reg->off);
 		} else {
@@ -1686,7 +1686,17 @@ static void __mark_reg_unknown(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	reg->type = SCALAR_VALUE;
 	reg->var_off = tnum_unknown;
 	reg->frameno = 0;
-	reg->precise = env->subprog_cnt > 1 || !env->bpf_capable;
+	/* Helpers requiring EXACT for constant arguments cannot be called from
+	 * programs without CAP_BPF. This is because we don't propagate
+	 * precision markers for when CAP_BPF is missing. If we allowed calling
+	 * such heleprs in those programs, the default would have to be EXACT
+	 * for them, which would be too aggresive.
+	 *
+	 * We still propagate EXACT when subprog_cnt > 1, hence those cases
+	 * would still override the default PRECISE value when we propagate the
+	 * precision markers.
+	 */
+	reg->precise = (env->subprog_cnt > 1 || !env->bpf_capable) ? PRECISE : NOT_PRECISE;
 	__mark_reg_unbounded(reg);
 }
 
@@ -2736,7 +2746,8 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx,
  * For now backtracking falls back into conservative marking.
  */
 static void mark_all_scalars_precise(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
-				     struct bpf_verifier_state *st)
+				     struct bpf_verifier_state *st,
+				     enum bpf_reg_precise precise)
 {
 	struct bpf_func_state *func;
 	struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
@@ -2752,7 +2763,7 @@ static void mark_all_scalars_precise(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 				reg = &func->regs[j];
 				if (reg->type != SCALAR_VALUE)
 					continue;
-				reg->precise = true;
+				reg->precise = precise;
 			}
 			for (j = 0; j < func->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; j++) {
 				if (!is_spilled_reg(&func->stack[j]))
@@ -2760,13 +2771,13 @@ static void mark_all_scalars_precise(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 				reg = &func->stack[j].spilled_ptr;
 				if (reg->type != SCALAR_VALUE)
 					continue;
-				reg->precise = true;
+				reg->precise = precise;
 			}
 		}
 }
 
 static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
-				  int spi)
+				  int spi, enum bpf_reg_precise precise)
 {
 	struct bpf_verifier_state *st = env->cur_state;
 	int first_idx = st->first_insn_idx;
@@ -2793,7 +2804,7 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
 			new_marks = true;
 		else
 			reg_mask = 0;
-		reg->precise = true;
+		reg->precise = precise;
 	}
 
 	while (spi >= 0) {
@@ -2810,7 +2821,7 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
 			new_marks = true;
 		else
 			stack_mask = 0;
-		reg->precise = true;
+		reg->precise = precise;
 		break;
 	}
 
@@ -2832,7 +2843,7 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
 				err = backtrack_insn(env, i, &reg_mask, &stack_mask);
 			}
 			if (err == -ENOTSUPP) {
-				mark_all_scalars_precise(env, st);
+				mark_all_scalars_precise(env, st, precise);
 				return 0;
 			} else if (err) {
 				return err;
@@ -2873,7 +2884,7 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
 			}
 			if (!reg->precise)
 				new_marks = true;
-			reg->precise = true;
+			reg->precise = precise;
 		}
 
 		bitmap_from_u64(mask, stack_mask);
@@ -2892,7 +2903,7 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
 				 * fp-8 and it's "unallocated" stack space.
 				 * In such case fallback to conservative.
 				 */
-				mark_all_scalars_precise(env, st);
+				mark_all_scalars_precise(env, st, precise);
 				return 0;
 			}
 
@@ -2907,7 +2918,7 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
 			}
 			if (!reg->precise)
 				new_marks = true;
-			reg->precise = true;
+			reg->precise = precise;
 		}
 		if (env->log.level & BPF_LOG_LEVEL2) {
 			verbose(env, "parent %s regs=%x stack=%llx marks:",
@@ -2927,14 +2938,16 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
 	return 0;
 }
 
-int mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno)
+static int mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
+				enum bpf_reg_precise precise)
 {
-	return __mark_chain_precision(env, regno, -1);
+	return __mark_chain_precision(env, regno, -1, precise);
 }
 
-static int mark_chain_precision_stack(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int spi)
+static int mark_chain_precision_stack(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int spi,
+				      enum bpf_reg_precise precise)
 {
-	return __mark_chain_precision(env, -1, spi);
+	return __mark_chain_precision(env, -1, spi, precise);
 }
 
 static bool is_spillable_regtype(enum bpf_reg_type type)
@@ -3069,7 +3082,7 @@ static int check_stack_write_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 			 * Backtrack from here and mark all registers as precise
 			 * that contributed into 'reg' being a constant.
 			 */
-			err = mark_chain_precision(env, value_regno);
+			err = mark_chain_precision(env, value_regno, PRECISE);
 			if (err)
 				return err;
 		}
@@ -3110,7 +3123,7 @@ static int check_stack_write_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		/* when we zero initialize stack slots mark them as such */
 		if (reg && register_is_null(reg)) {
 			/* backtracking doesn't work for STACK_ZERO yet. */
-			err = mark_chain_precision(env, value_regno);
+			err = mark_chain_precision(env, value_regno, PRECISE);
 			if (err)
 				return err;
 			type = STACK_ZERO;
@@ -3226,7 +3239,7 @@ static int check_stack_write_var_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	}
 	if (zero_used) {
 		/* backtracking doesn't work for STACK_ZERO yet. */
-		err = mark_chain_precision(env, value_regno);
+		err = mark_chain_precision(env, value_regno, PRECISE);
 		if (err)
 			return err;
 	}
@@ -3275,7 +3288,7 @@ static void mark_reg_stack_read(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		 * backtracking. Any register that contributed
 		 * to const 0 was marked precise before spill.
 		 */
-		state->regs[dst_regno].precise = true;
+		state->regs[dst_regno].precise = PRECISE;
 	} else {
 		/* have read misc data from the stack */
 		mark_reg_unknown(env, state->regs, dst_regno);
@@ -5342,7 +5355,7 @@ static int check_mem_size_reg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 				      reg->umax_value,
 				      zero_size_allowed, meta);
 	if (!err)
-		err = mark_chain_precision(env, regno);
+		err = mark_chain_precision(env, regno, PRECISE);
 	return err;
 }
 
@@ -6150,7 +6163,7 @@ static int check_func_arg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 arg,
 			return -EACCES;
 		}
 		meta->mem_size = reg->var_off.value;
-		err = mark_chain_precision(env, regno);
+		err = mark_chain_precision(env, regno, PRECISE);
 		if (err)
 			return err;
 		break;
@@ -7128,7 +7141,7 @@ record_func_key(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_call_arg_meta *meta,
 		return 0;
 	}
 
-	err = mark_chain_precision(env, BPF_REG_3);
+	err = mark_chain_precision(env, BPF_REG_3, PRECISE);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
 	if (bpf_map_key_unseen(aux))
@@ -7228,7 +7241,7 @@ static bool loop_flag_is_zero(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 	bool reg_is_null = register_is_null(reg);
 
 	if (reg_is_null)
-		mark_chain_precision(env, BPF_REG_4);
+		mark_chain_precision(env, BPF_REG_4, PRECISE);
 
 	return reg_is_null;
 }
@@ -8049,7 +8062,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
 					verbose(env, "R%d must be a known constant\n", regno);
 					return -EINVAL;
 				}
-				ret = mark_chain_precision(env, regno);
+				ret = mark_chain_precision(env, regno, EXACT);
 				if (ret < 0)
 					return ret;
 				meta->arg_constant.found = true;
@@ -8073,7 +8086,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
 				}
 
 				meta->r0_size = reg->var_off.value;
-				ret = mark_chain_precision(env, regno);
+				ret = mark_chain_precision(env, regno, PRECISE);
 				if (ret)
 					return ret;
 			}
@@ -9752,7 +9765,7 @@ static int adjust_reg_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 				 * This is legal, but we have to reverse our
 				 * src/dest handling in computing the range
 				 */
-				err = mark_chain_precision(env, insn->dst_reg);
+				err = mark_chain_precision(env, insn->dst_reg, PRECISE);
 				if (err)
 					return err;
 				return adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(env, insn,
@@ -9760,7 +9773,7 @@ static int adjust_reg_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 			}
 		} else if (ptr_reg) {
 			/* pointer += scalar */
-			err = mark_chain_precision(env, insn->src_reg);
+			err = mark_chain_precision(env, insn->src_reg, PRECISE);
 			if (err)
 				return err;
 			return adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(env, insn,
@@ -10756,10 +10769,10 @@ static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		 * above is_branch_taken() special cased the 0 comparison.
 		 */
 		if (!__is_pointer_value(false, dst_reg))
-			err = mark_chain_precision(env, insn->dst_reg);
+			err = mark_chain_precision(env, insn->dst_reg, PRECISE);
 		if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X && !err &&
 		    !__is_pointer_value(false, src_reg))
-			err = mark_chain_precision(env, insn->src_reg);
+			err = mark_chain_precision(env, insn->src_reg, PRECISE);
 		if (err)
 			return err;
 	}
@@ -12080,9 +12093,19 @@ static bool regsafe(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *rold,
 		if (rcur->type == SCALAR_VALUE) {
 			if (!rold->precise && !rcur->precise)
 				return true;
-			/* new val must satisfy old val knowledge */
-			return range_within(rold, rcur) &&
-			       tnum_in(rold->var_off, rcur->var_off);
+			/* We can only determine safety when type of precision
+			 * needed is same. For EXACT, we need values to match
+			 * exactly, so simply return false as the memcmp above
+			 * failed already, otherwise current being within the
+			 * old value suffices.
+			 */
+			if (rold->precise == EXACT || rcur->precise == EXACT) {
+				return false;
+			} else {
+				/* new val must satisfy old val knowledge */
+				return range_within(rold, rcur) &&
+				       tnum_in(rold->var_off, rcur->var_off);
+			}
 		} else {
 			/* We're trying to use a pointer in place of a scalar.
 			 * Even if the scalar was unbounded, this could lead to
@@ -12411,8 +12434,9 @@ static int propagate_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		    !state_reg->precise)
 			continue;
 		if (env->log.level & BPF_LOG_LEVEL2)
-			verbose(env, "propagating r%d\n", i);
-		err = mark_chain_precision(env, i);
+			verbose(env, "propagating %sr%d\n",
+				state_reg->precise == EXACT ? "exact " : "", i);
+		err = mark_chain_precision(env, i, state_reg->precise);
 		if (err < 0)
 			return err;
 	}
@@ -12425,9 +12449,10 @@ static int propagate_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		    !state_reg->precise)
 			continue;
 		if (env->log.level & BPF_LOG_LEVEL2)
-			verbose(env, "propagating fp%d\n",
+			verbose(env, "propagating %sfp%d\n",
+				state_reg->precise == EXACT ? "exact " : "",
 				(-i - 1) * BPF_REG_SIZE);
-		err = mark_chain_precision_stack(env, i);
+		err = mark_chain_precision_stack(env, i, state_reg->precise);
 		if (err < 0)
 			return err;
 	}
