Sorry that I'm getting to your question so late, but I'm glad to see people being interested in this sadly overlooked period in history. There are indeed a number of sources that of Felicissimus's rebellion of the mint workers, such as the Eptiome de Caesaribus, Zosimus, Eutropius, and the notoriously unreliable, but sometimes useful, Historia Augusta. In all the sources, the revolt is treated as a peripheral footnote barely worth mentioning, although I think it becomes more important if you look at the wider context of the time period: the 270s AD. I would like to elaborate on the context of the period a bit further.

The revolt of Felicissimus occurred during one of Rome's most poorly documented and confusing periods, the Crisis of the Third Century, a time of both internal and external crises, economic decline, and political upheaval. The Crisis had reached a fever pitch by the time Aurelian ascended the throne in 270, with the western provinces in open rebellion under the Gallic Emperors, and the East held firmly under the sway of Queen Zenobia. At the time he was proclaimed by the troops, Aurelian was fighting barbarians, perhaps near Sirmium, although the chronologies of the period are so bad that it would be impossible to know Aurelian's exact whereabouts; even the date of the revolt is uncertain, but it is generally agreed to have occurred in 271. According to Pat Southern's The Roman Empire From Severus to Constantine, Aurelian's attempts at reforming the currency, in an abysmal state by the 270s, and his reputation for harsh discipline, spawned the revolt. Southern suggests that the revolt may have been spurred on or even funded by senators, as Zosimus asserts that " Several members of the Senate being at this time accused of conspiring against the emperor were put to death" (Zosimus, New History 1.49). Whatever the causes, the rebellion was swiftly and harshly put down, and Felicissimus either executed by Aurelian or killed in the intense urban fighting. The mint at Rome was closed.

So in conclusion, the Eptiome de Caesaribus, Zosimus, Eutropius, and the (unreliable) Historia Augusta speak of it. The details are scarce and vague, but that is in keeping with the general tone of the sources of the time period. For more on the Crisis of the Third Century I would recommend Pat Southern's The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine, Clifford Ado's Imperial Rome AD 193 to 284, Empress Zenobia: Palmyra's Rebel Queen, also by Pat Southern, and Michael Grant's The Climax of Rome. I have heard David Potter's The Roman Empire at Bay, AD 180-395 is good, but I haven't gotten around to reading it yet.