Good article on DPS by Andrew S. Gibson about this subject.
(not posting a link here because the knee-jerk reaction from Admin would be to move this post to the links section or to the attic).

Note in my title I say STATIC focusing. Gibson did not differentiate static from dynamic focus in his article so I'm doing it here.

He cites 3 reasons for superiority of Mirrorless over DSLR for static focusing (below is not a copy this is my interpretation of the article):

(1) Direct focusing on the sensor. Lower complexity, no calibration or fine focus adjustments or adjustments for different lenses, are ever needed.

(2) Better manual focus tools. On DSLR's manual focus aids like split prism screens are a thing of the past. The little arrows aren't much help. Mirrorless cameras offer better manual focus tools; Focus peaking or image magnifying functions, viewable through the electronic viewfinder (ELF), which greatly aid in achieving sharp manual focus.

(3) Ability to display additional information like a Hyperfocal distance tool which displays information directly in the ELF.

All of the above rely on the ELF which shows exactly what the sensor is recording. DSLRs do not have an ELF. Some people still violently prefer seeing the scene through glass rather than a picture of a picture. However ELF's over many advantages over optical. Maybe in the future someone will offer a DSLR with a "live view" functions that is visible through the optical eyepiece and switchable from optical to live view.

Wow we are all caught up in the technology of focusing. Took my new Sony 6300 to kids museum with grandkids. First I love the look of the pictures. And shot some video which in "shutter"
and the camera did a great job with higher ISO's with a limit.
Focus was fine interesting I shut off the sound ex and was not sure of focus a few times. My first impressions of the 6300 are wow what imagery what a camera. I own the s7s and lens. And this $1000 camera comes very close to the new a7sII according to reviews. I used the kit lens 16 to 50mm (24 70) which got so so reviews but love it. All of my Sony FF lens the 55mm zeiss and the 70 200 Sony G lens will go right on this camera. Not thrilled about croped camera but is seems a good experience.
Ok you want to know about focusing I am off subject well even with film camera's had soft focus sometimes. But today with have digital and don't have to pay for hundreds of dollars for developing.

Perhaps the reference to sound was about the audio beeps and squawks that some cameras do or can emit when focus confirmation is achieved.

Overall this thread has been interesting. My personal perspective is that all camera formats have virtues while none have a universal advantage at this time. I strongly believe that the cameras that will be available three or five years from now will have evolved significantly and the "this vs that" debate will be seen as irrelevant when seen though the rear view mirror of history.

Buy and use what suits you best now, and look to what may be available in the future. This game is far from over.

Back to your original post, I was involved in a meeting yesterday where we shot some video, with multiple cameras. I was responsible for one using my Canon T3i with Magic Lantern alongside a couple of Canon professional video cameras. All of my work was done through live view (it was indoors, so no screen problems) and the ML focus peaking, audio capabilities etc. we really useful. So my DSLR was functioning just like a mirrorless camera in that respect and did just as good a job.

Looking forwards we need to look at what the tech could possibly do, not just to what is on sale today. That is the benefit of ML on some Canon DSLRs. It proves what the tech can actually do today that is just not supported by the manufacturer at this point in time.