False Positive: INTEGER_OVERFLOW_L2 reported on safe loop with small compile-time upper bound

**Describe the bug**
Infer incorrectly reports an `INTEGER_OVERFLOW_L2` warning on a loop that is provably safe.

The loop counter `counted` is strictly bounded by `expected=10`, so `counted += 1` can never reach `Integer.MAX_VALUE`. Nevertheless, Infer conservatively flags the call site because `max = Integer.MAX_VALUE`.

**To Reproduce**

```java
public class a {

public static void main(String[] args) {
reproduceOverflowFP(10, Integer.MAX_VALUE); // ← FP reported here
}

private static void reproduceOverflowFP(int expected, int max) {
int counted;
for (counted = 0; (counted <= max) && (counted < expected); counted += 1) {
// loop body empty
}
}
}
```
**Expected behavior**
No INTEGER_OVERFLOW_L2 should be reported because:

expected is a small compile-time constant (10)
the loop condition (counted < expected) guarantees counted stays in range [0, 9]
counted += 1 can never cause integer overflow

**Actual behavior**
Infer reports:
Integer Overflow L2
([0, 2147483647] + 1):signed32 by call to void a.reproduceOverflowFP(int,int).
at line 5 (the call site in main)