atomic64_read() doesn't actually write anything (as far as the C
environment is concerned... the CPU does actually write but that's an
implementation quirk), so it should take a const pointer.

This does NOT mean that it is safe to use atomic64_read() on an object
in readonly storage (it will trap!)
Reported-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20120109165859.1879abda.akpm@linux-foundation.org