False positive: incorrect const suggestion when overloading operator() [constParameter]

[Stefan Löffler]

struct A {
    int i{0};
    const int & operator()() const { return i; }
    int & operator()() { return i; }
};

int getVal(const A & a) { return a(); }
void setVal(A & a) { a() = 1; }

produces

function-call-overload.cpp:8:17: style: Parameter 'a' can be declared with const [constParameter]
void setVal(A & a) { a() = 1; }
                ^

which is incorrect because the non-const overload has to be used. Interestingly, this error goes away when using operator[] instead of operator().
This is closely related to #9266 and may also be related to issues #9759, #9760,

[CHR]

I can't reproduce this with 2.3.